{"paper":{"title":"Kraken reveals itself -- the merger history of the Milky Way reconstructed with the E-MOSAICS simulations","arxiv_id":"2003.01119","primary_cat":"astro-ph.GA","submitted_at":"2020-03-02T19:00:00+00:00","version_compiled":"v1"},"notice":"Every quoted sentence is the authors' text from the arXiv listing abstract. Labels and probabilities are the outputs of classifier-1.13.0 on the question bank abstract-p1-20260923, exactly as returned. No sentence in this record was written by a language model.","schema":"pith.compiled-record/v0","status":"compiled","abstract":{"source":"arXiv listing abstract v1","sentences":[{"i":0,"p":0.99,"id":"s0","own":false,"role":"background","text":"Globular clusters (GCs) formed when the Milky Way experienced a phase of rapid assembly.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.13,"main_claim_p":0.04,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.05,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.01,"background":0.99,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":1,"p":0.94,"id":"s1","own":true,"role":"contribution","text":"We use the wealth of information contained in the Galactic GC population to quantify the properties of the satellite galaxies from which the Milky Way assembled.","hedge":{"p":0.96,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.61,"main_claim_p":0.03,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.04,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.05,"result":0.0,"background":0.01,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.94,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":2,"p":1.0,"id":"s2","own":true,"role":"method","text":"To achieve this, we train an artificial neural network on the E-MOSAICS cosmological simulations of the co-formation and co-evolution of GCs and their host galaxies.","hedge":{"p":0.98,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.93,"main_claim_p":0.02,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.05,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":1.0,"result":0.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":3,"p":1.0,"id":"s3","own":true,"role":"method","text":"The network uses the ages, metallicities, and orbital properties of GCs that formed in the same progenitor galaxies to predict the stellar masses and accretion redshifts of these progenitors.","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.8,"main_claim_p":0.03,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.09,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":1.0,"result":0.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":4,"p":0.77,"id":"s4","own":true,"role":"result","text":"We apply the network to Galactic GCs associated with five progenitors: {\\it Gaia}-Enceladus, the Helmi streams, Sequoia, Sagittarius, and the recently discovered, `low-energy' GCs, which provide an excellent match to the predicted properties of the enigmatic galaxy `Kraken'.","hedge":{"p":0.95,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.89,"main_claim_p":0.15,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.87,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.04,"result":0.77,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.18,"interpretation":0.01}},{"i":5,"p":1.0,"id":"s5","own":true,"role":"result","text":"The five galaxies cover a narrow stellar mass range [$M_\\star=(0.6{-}4.6)\\times10^8~{\\rm M}_\\odot$], but have widely different accretion redshifts ($z_{\\rm acc}=0.57{-}2.65$).","hedge":{"p":1.0,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.89,"main_claim_p":0.05,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":1.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.0}},{"i":6,"p":0.88,"id":"s6","own":true,"role":"result","text":"All accretion events represent minor mergers, but Kraken likely represents the most major merger ever experienced by the Milky Way, with stellar and virial mass ratios of $r_{M_\\star}=1$:$31^{+34}_{-16}$ and $r_{M_{\\rm h}}=1$:$7^{+4}_{-2}$, respectively.","hedge":{"p":0.95,"label":"hedged_possibility"},"own_p":0.89,"main_claim_p":0.3,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.88,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.12}},{"i":7,"p":0.91,"id":"s7","own":true,"role":"result","text":"The progenitors match the $z=0$ relation between GC number and halo virial mass, but have elevated specific frequencies, suggesting an evolution with redshift.","hedge":{"p":0.73,"label":"hedged_possibility"},"own_p":0.86,"main_claim_p":0.06,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.59,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.91,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.09}},{"i":8,"p":0.98,"id":"s8","own":true,"role":"result","text":"Even though these progenitors likely were the Milky Way's most massive accretion events, they contributed a total mass of only $\\log{(M_{\\rm \\star,tot}/{\\rm M}_\\odot)}=9.0\\pm0.1$, similar to the stellar halo.","hedge":{"p":0.65,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.9,"main_claim_p":0.12,"quantitative":true,"quantitative_p":0.99,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.98,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":0.02}},{"i":9,"p":1.0,"id":"s9","own":true,"role":"interpretation","text":"This implies that the Milky Way grew its stellar mass mostly by in-situ star formation.","hedge":{"p":0.86,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.79,"main_claim_p":0.24,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.26,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.0,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.0,"contribution":0.0,"interpretation":1.0}},{"i":10,"p":0.97,"id":"s10","own":true,"role":"contribution","text":"We conclude by organising these accretion events into the most detailed reconstruction to date of the Milky Way's merger tree.","hedge":{"p":0.97,"label":"asserted"},"own_p":0.93,"main_claim_p":0.28,"quantitative":false,"quantitative_p":0.13,"role_probabilities":{"gap":0.0,"method":0.0,"result":0.02,"background":0.0,"limitation":0.0,"future_work":0.01,"contribution":0.97,"interpretation":0.0}}]},"compiled":{"main_claim":{"p":0.68,"text":"We conclude by organising these accretion events into the most detailed reconstruction to date of the Milky Way's merger tree.","location":"abstract s10","hedge_strength":{"p":0.97,"label":"asserted"}},"provenance":{"route":{"via":"TypeSafe API","model":"classifier-1.13.0","endpoint":"https://api.typesafe.ai/v1/systemone","provider":"TypeSafe"},"packing":"one request per paper","requests":1,"input_tokens":8723,"cost_usd_reported":0.0},"compiled_at":"2026-09-23","bank_version":"abstract-p1-20260923","model_version":"classifier-1.13.0","abstract_states":{"claims_first":0.18,"states_limitation":0.48,"human_participants":0.02,"controlled_comparison":0.07,"randomized_assignment":0.01,"states_quantitative_result":0.99,"compares_with_prior_results":0.22,"mentions_code_or_data_availability":0.03},"evidential_basis":{"p":0.79,"value":"simulation or computation","probabilities":{"argument":0.0,"literature":0.0,"proof_or_derivation":0.0,"analysis_of_existing_data":0.21,"observation_or_experiment":0.0,"simulation_or_computation":0.79}},"contribution_type":{"p":0.7,"value":"simulation study","probabilities":{"review":0.0,"method_or_tool":0.28,"empirical_study":0.02,"simulation_study":0.7,"theoretical_result":0.0,"dataset_or_benchmark":0.0,"position_or_commentary":0.0}},"contribution_statement":{"p":0.35,"text":"We conclude by organising these accretion events into the most detailed reconstruction to date of the Milky Way's merger tree.","location":"abstract s10"}},"coverage":{"tier":"abstract","levels_run":["P abstract"],"not_examined":["full text","figures and tables","references and citing sentences","relations to other papers"],"sources_read":["arXiv listing abstract v1"],"levels_not_run":["S sections","T body sentences","C citations","R cross-paper relations"],"sentences_examined":11,"sentences_in_abstract":11},"measured_accuracy":{"url":"https://pith.science/accuracy","measured_on":"2026-10-02","method":"two independent model families labelled a fresh random sample blind; the figure is how often the published label matches their consensus","sentence_role_agreement":0.92,"main_claim_agreement":0.908,"typed_citation_agreement":0.933,"typed_citation_agreement_95_interval":[0.917,0.945],"review_comments_accurate":0.758,"review_comments_accurate_95_interval":[0.684,0.82],"review_caught_admitted_error_found_or_related":0.448}}