MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1982259031 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stt092

Kepler photometry and optical spectroscopy of the ZZ Lep central star of the planetary nebula NGC 6826: rotational and wind variability

2013· article· en· W1982259031 on OpenAlexaff
G. Handler, R. K. Prinja, Miguel A. Urbaneja, V. Antoci, Joseph D. Twicken, Thomas Barclay

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsPhotometry (optics)AstrophysicsAstronomyLight curveStarsNebulaOrbital periodAmplitudeSpectroscopyStellar rotation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present three years of long-cadence and over one year of short-cadence photometry of the central star of the planetary nebula NGC 6826 obtained with the Kepler spacecraft, and temporally coinciding optical spectroscopy. The light curves are dominated by incoherent variability on time-scales of several hours, but contain a lower amplitude periodicity of 1.237 99 d. The temporal amplitude and shape changes of this signal are best explicable with a rotational modulation, and are not consistent with a binary interpretation. We argue that we do not observe stellar pulsations within the limitations of our data, and show that a binary central star with an orbital period less than seven days could only have escaped our detection in the case of low orbital inclination. Combining the photometric and spectroscopic evidence, we reason that the hourly variations are due to a variable stellar wind, and are global in nature. The physical cause of the wind variability of NGC 6826 and other ZZ Leporis stars is likely related to the mechanism responsible for wind variations in massive hot stars.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→