The Cepheid impostor HD 18391 and its anonymous parent cluster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract New and existing photometry for the G0 Ia supergiant HD 18391 is analyzed in order to confirm the nature of the variability previously detected in the star, which lies off the hot edge of the Cepheid instability strip. Small‐amplitude variability at a level of δV = 0.016 ± 0.002 is indicated, with a period of P = 123d.04 ± 0d.06. A weaker second signal may be present at P = 177d.84 ± 0d.18 with δV = 0.007 ± 0.002, likely corresponding to fundamental mode pulsation if the primary signal represents overtone pulsation (123.04/177.84 = 0.69). The star, with a spectroscopic reddening of EB–V = 1.02 ± 0.003, is associated with heavily‐reddened B‐type stars in its immediate vicinity that appear to be outlying members of an anonymous young cluster centered ∼10′ to the west and 1661 ± 73 pc distant. The cluster has nuclear and coronal radii of rn = 3.5′ and Rc = 14′, respectively, while the parameters for HD 18391 derived from membership in the cluster with its outlying B stars are consistent with those implied by its Cepheid‐like pulsation, provided that it follows the semi‐period‐luminosity relation expected of such objects. Its inferred luminosity as a cluster member is MV = –7.76 ± 0.10, its age (9 ± 1) × 106 years, and its evolutionary mass ∼19 M⊙. HD 18391 is not a classical Cepheid, yet it follows the Cepheid period‐luminosity relation closely, much like another Cepheid impostor, V810 Cen (© 2009 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".