Colliding Winds in Symbiotic Binary Systems. I. Analytic and Numerical Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present new formulations of binary colliding wind models appropriate to symbiotic star systems. The derived models differ from previous formulations in assuming mixing of the shocked material from both incoming streams, rather than postulating a self-sustaining contact discontinuity. The CWb model (colliding winds, binary) extends the work of Girard and Willson by the derivation of an adiabatic temperature, the consideration of radiative cooling, the inclusion of thermal pressures in the incoming winds, and the treatment of interaction shells of finite thickness and density. The finite thickness of the interaction shell allows for calculation of its radiative intensity distribution. The CWc model (colliding winds, concentric) is a similar extension of the model of Kwok, Purton, and Fitzgerald. It is derived in a manner parallel to that of the CWb model, thereby facilitating a unification of the two models. A unified model is desired since wind collisions in symbiotic systems should include aspects of both CWb and CWc interactions. Two examples of model applications are presented: a comparison of the flux densities arising from colliding winds (CWb model) with those arising from the ionization of the surrounding medium (STB model) in the galactic population of symbiotic stars, and model imaging of the symbiotic nova HM Sge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".