MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1622545863 · doi:10.1063/1.3246569

Polaris and its Kin

2009· preprint· en· W1622545863 on OpenAlexaff
D. G. Turner, Joyce Ann Guzik, Paul A. Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A review is presented of the past 165 years of observation of the 4‐day Cepheid Polaris, including the exciting results of the last 50 years, an interval that has produced three orbital solutions for the spectroscopic binary subsystem, recently resolved by HST, parameters for the optical companion, precise measurement of the star’s trigonometric parallax and angular diameter, evidence for a rapid increase in its pulsation period, and observations of the dramatic decline and recent partial recovery of its light amplitude. There has been considerable discussion about the exact nature of the star, with potential resolutions summarized here. It is also noted that many of the star’s characteristics are shared by a small number of other Cepheids that display rapid period increases identical to those predicted for stars in the first crossing of the instability strip, small light amplitudes, and intrinsic colors typical of variables lying near the center of the strip, where Cepheids of largest amplitude normally reside. While all members of the group appear to display the canonical traits of first crossers of the instability strip, Polaris has one unique peculiarity: a brief hiatus in its monotonic period increment between 1963 and 1966 during which the pulsation period underwent a dramatic decrease. Has the average brightness of the Cepheid also increased over the last millennium?

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207