ULTRAVIOLET SPECTROSCOPY OF THE MASSIVE LMC MULTIPLE SYSTEMS SK-67 18 (BR 5) AND HD 36402 (BR 31)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following previous IUE-based spectroscopic studies of WR+O binaries in the Galaxy and in the SMC, we present a similar study of the two systems, Br 5 [O3 If (+O) + O8{B0 I(+OB?)] and Br 31 [WC4(+O?) + O8 I:] in the Large Magellanic Cloud. We detect wind eclipse eects in the WC4+O (P = 3:033 d) pair in Br 31 similar to, but weaker than those observed in the Small Magellanic Cloud system Sk 188 (WO4+O4 V). A low-amplitude ( 40 km s 1 ) variation in the radial velocity of UV photospheric absorption lines and the O V 1371 emission with the 3 day period is detected. The radial velocity variations of the photospheric lines may be due to the superposition of the stationary set of absorption lines belonging to the O8 I: star and a broader set of lines belonging to the O-type companion in the close binary pair. The UV continuum energy distribution of Br 31 also supports the optical results that the system contains at least 3 bright stars, one of which is a late O-type supergiant. Contrasting with Br 31, the absence of signican t Si IV 1400 A emission in the UV spectrum of Br 5 contradicts the results from optical spectroscopy that imply that it is triple, with the presence of a late O-type supergiant in the system. Orbital phase-coverage of the IUE observations does not allow the detection of possible atmospheric eclipse eects in Br 5, with P = 2:001 d, but radial velocity variations attributable to orbital motion of the O3 If star are detected.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".