SOLAR-LIKE OSCILLATIONS AND ACTIVITY IN PROCYON: A COMPARISON OF THE 2007<i>MOST</i>AND GROUND-BASED RADIAL VELOCITY CAMPAIGNS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compare the simultaneous 2007 space-based MOST photometry and ground-based radial velocity (RV) observations of the F5 star Procyon. We identify slow variations in the MOST data that are similar to those reported in the RV time series and confirm by comparison with the Sun that these variations are likely the signature of stellar activity. The MOST power spectrum yields clear evidence for individual oscillation frequencies that match those found in the RV data by Bedding et al. We identify the same ridges due to modes of different spherical degree in both data sets, but are not able to confirm a definite ridge identification using the MOST data. We measure the luminosity amplitude per radial mode A l =0,phot = 9.1 ± 0.5 ppm. Combined with the estimate for the RV data by Arentoft et al., this gives a mean amplitude ratio of A l =0,phot / A l =0,RV = 0.24 ± 0.02 ppm cm −1 s, considerably higher than expected from scaling relations but in reasonable agreement with theoretical models by Houdek. We also compare the amplitude ratio as a function of frequency and find that the maximum of the oscillation envelope is shifted to higher frequencies in photometry than in velocity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".