MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972537629 · doi:10.1086/381068

The Circumstellar Envelope of Tauri through Optical Interferometry

2004· article· en· W1972537629 on OpenAlexaff
C. Tycner, Arsen R. Hajian, J. T. Armstrong, J. A. Benson, G. C. Gilbreath, D. J. Hutter, John B. Lester, David Mozurkewich, T. Pauls

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsInterferometryCircumstellar envelopeAstrophysicsEnvelope (radar)Position angleT Tauri starMonte Carlo methodCommon envelopeOpticsBinary numberPhotometerBinary starPosition (finance)StarsRadar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present optical interferometric observations of the Be star ζ Tauri obtained using the Navy Prototype Optical Interferometer (NPOI). The multichannel capability of the NPOI allows a high-quality internal calibration of the squared visibilities corresponding to the Hα emission from the circumstellar environment. The observations suggest a strong departure from circular symmetry and thus are described by an elliptical Gaussian model. We use a nonlinear least-squares fit to the data to obtain the likeliest parameters, and the corresponding uncertainties are determined using a Monte Carlo simulation. We obtain 3.14 ± 0.21 mas for the angular size of the major axis, -623 ± 44 for the position angle, and 0.310 ± 0.072 for the axial ratio. By comparing our results with those already in the literature, we conclude that the model parameters describing the general characteristics of the circumstellar envelope of ζ Tau appear to be stable on timescales of years. We also compare our results with the known parameters describing the binary nature of ζ Tau, and we conclude that the envelope surrounds only the primary component and is well within its Roche lobe.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207