RADIO FREQUENCY MODELS OF NOVAE IN ERUPTION. I. THE FREE-FREE PROCESS IN BIPOLAR MORPHOLOGIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Observations of novae at radio frequencies provide us with a measure of the total ejected mass, density profile, and kinetic energy of a nova eruption. The radio emission is typically well characterized by the free–free emission process. Most models to date have assumed spherical symmetry for the eruption, although for as long as there have been radio observations of these systems, it has been known that spherical eruptions are too simplistic a geometry. In this paper, we build bipolar models of the nova eruption, assuming the free–free process, and show the effects of varying different parameters on the radio light curves. The parameters considered include the ratio of the minor- to major-axis, the inclination angle, and shell thickness. We also show the uncertainty introduced when fitting spherical-model synthetic light curves to bipolar-model synthetic light curves. We find that the optically thick phase rises with the same power law ( S ν ∝ t 2 ) for both the spherical and bipolar models. In the bipolar case, there is a "plateau" phase—depending on the thickness of the shell as well as the ratio of the minor- to major-axis—before the final decline, which follows the same power law ( S ν ∝ t −3 ) as in the spherical case. Finally, fitting spherical models to the bipolar-model synthetic light curves requires, in the worst-case scenario, doubling the ejected mass, more than halving the electron temperature, and reducing the shell thickness by nearly a factor of 10. This implies that in some systems we have been over-predicting the ejected masses and under-predicting the electron temperature of the ejecta.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".