MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984825576 · doi:10.1017/s1743921313014737

g-mode trapping and period spacings in hot B subdwarf stars

2013· article· en· W1984825576 on OpenAlexaff
S. Charpinet, V. Van Grootel, P. Brassard, G. Fontaine

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsStarsSubdwarfAstrophysicsPhysicsHomogeneousHeliumSpectral lineAstronomyWhite dwarf

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hot B subdwarfs (sdB) are hot and compact helium core burning stars of nearly half a solar mass that can develop pulsational instabilities driving acoustic and/or gravity modes. These evolved stars are expected to be chemically stratified with an almost pure hydrogen envelope surrounding a helium mantle on top of a carbon/oxygen enriched core. However, the sdB stars pulsating in g-modes show regularities in their observed period distributions that, surprisingly (at first sight), are typical of the behavior of high order g-modes in chemically homogeneous (i.e., non-stratified) stars. This led to a claim that hot B subdwarfs could be much less chemically stratified than previously thought. Here, we reinvestigate trapping effects affecting g-modes in sdB stars. We show that standard stratified models of such stars can also produce nearly constant period spacings in the low frequency range similar to those found in g-mode spectra of sdB stars monitored with Kepler.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical UnionSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207