MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A closer look at the X-ray transient XTE J1908+094: identification of two new near-infrared candidate counterparts

2005· article· en· W1946887857 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosition (finance)Binary numberFlux (metallurgy)Star (game theory)Identification (biology)Transient (computer programming)Sequence (biology)Adaptive opticsLimit (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have reported, in our previous paper, on the near-infrared (NIR) identification of a possible counterpart to the black hole candidate XTE J1908+094 obtained with the European Southern Observatory/New Technology Telescope. Here, we present new, follow-up, Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope adaptive optics observations of the XTE J1908+094 field, which resolved the previously proposed counterpart in two objects separated by about 0.8 arcsec. Assuming that both objects are potential candidate counterparts, we derive that the binary system is a low-mass system with a companion star which could be either an intermediate/late type (A–K) main-sequence star at a distance of 3–10 kpc or a late-type (>K) main-sequence star at a distance of 1–3 kpc. However, we show that the brighter of the two objects (J∼ 20.1, H∼ 18.7, K′∼ 17.8) is more likely to be the real counterpart of the X-ray source. Its position is more compatible with our astrometric solution, and colours and magnitudes of the other object are not consistent with the lower limit of 3 kpc derived independently from the peak bolometric flux of XTE J1908+094. Further multiwavelength observations of both candidate counterparts are crucial in order to solve the pending identification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207