MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966697426 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/774/1/58

THE FAST AND FURIOUS DECAY OF THE PECULIAR TYPE Ic SUPERNOVA 2005ek

2013· article· en· W1966697426 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEjectaSupernovaWhite dwarfLight curvePair-instability supernovaDetonationSpectral line

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present extensive multi-wavelength observations of the extremely rapidly declining Type Ic supernova, SN 2005ek. Reaching a peak magnitude of M_R = -17.3 and decaying by ~3 mag in the first 15 days post-maximum, SN 2005ek is among the fastest Type I supernovae observed to date. The spectra of SN 2005ek closely resemble those of normal SN Ic, but with an accelerated evolution. There is evidence for the onset of nebular features at only nine days post-maximum. Spectroscopic modeling reveals an ejecta mass of ~0.3 Msun that is dominated by oxygen (~80%), while the pseudo-bolometric light curve is consistent with an explosion powered by ~0.03 Msun of radioactive Ni-56. Although previous rapidly evolving events (e.g., SN 1885A, SN 1939B, SN 2002bj, SN 2010X) were hypothesized to be produced by the detonation of a helium shell on a white dwarf, oxygen-dominated ejecta are difficult to reconcile with this proposed mechanism. We find that the properties of SN 2005ek are consistent with either the edge-lit double detonation of a low-mass white dwarf or the iron-core collapse of a massive star, stripped by binary interaction. However, if we assume that the strong spectroscopic similarity of SN 2005ek to other SN Ic is an indication of a similar progenitor channel, then a white-dwarf progenitor becomes very improbable. SN 2005ek may be one of the lowest mass stripped-envelope core-collapse explosions ever observed. We find that the rate of such rapidly declining Type I events is at least 1-3% of the normal SN Ia rate.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

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

Citations118
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207