MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W105347706 · doi:10.1017/s0074180900208334

Nature of the H<sub>2</sub> Emission Around Planetary Nebulae Precursors

2003· article· en· W105347706 on OpenAlexaff
D. A. García–Hernández, A. Manchado, P. García-Lario, Carlos Domínguez-Tagle, Gail M. Conway, Francisco Prada

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium - International Astronomical Union · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetary nebulaExcited stateStarsAstrophysicsPhysicsEmission spectrumOvertoneHydrogen moleculeSpectroscopySpectral lineHydrogenAstronomyAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present near-IR spectroscopy of a sample of 30 IRAS sources recently identified as late AGB stars, post-AGB stars or early PNe. The spectra obtained are centred at various wavelengths covering the molecular hydrogen v =1→0 S(1) 2.122 μm and v=2→1 S(1) 2.248 μm emission lines, the recombination lines of hydrogen Brγ 2.166 μm, Pfγ 3.741 μm and Brα 4.052 μm, and the CO[ v =2→0] first overtone bandhead at 2.294 μm. As a result of these observations we have increased from 4 to 13 the total number of proto-PNe detected in H 2 and we have confirmed that the onset of H 2 emission takes place in the post-AGB phase. When the molecular hydrogen is fluorescence-excited the detection rate is found to be directly correlated with the evolutionary stage of the central star, rather than with the nebular morphology. In contrast, shocked-excited H 2 is detected only in strongly bipolar proto-PNe, sometimes even at an early stage in the post-AGB phase. The strong correlation of shocked-excited H 2 emission with bipolarity found confirms the result previously reported by Kastner et al. (1996) in evolved PNe. However, our results show that this correlation does not exist in the case of fluorescence-excited molecular hydrogen. (to be published in A&amp;A).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium - International Astronomical UnionSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207