A <i>HST</i> imaging survey of a sample of 61 Galactic Wolf-Rayet stars — the WC8-9 subsample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A HST -wfpc2 survey of Galactic Wolf-Rayet stars was undertaken over a five year period, in an effort to discover new close visual companions, tight clusters, and/or association memberships. In total, 61 Galactic WR stars were observed, with nine objects being members of the subclasses WC8 and WC9, which are associated with dust production. For these nine, we present images of WR 11, WR 48a, WR 69, WR 70, WR 81, and WR 92. We refer to Wallace et al. (2002) for discussion of WR 98a, WR 104, and WR 112. Overall, we find for separations of approximately ≥ 150 mas, that the binary/association properties of the WC8/WC9 sample are statistically indistinguishable from the overall WR population. These statistics are limited, however, by the small numbers of each WR subclass observed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".