Colliding Winds in Symbiotic Binary Systems. II. Colliding Winds Geometries and Orbital Motion in the Symbiotic Nova AG Pegasi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AG Pegasi has been observed at high angular resolution and sensitivity at the Very Large Array (VLA) at 5 GHz in four epochs between 1984 and 1991. Analysis of the radio visibilities indicate that a mass of 4.0 ± 0.5 × 10 -5 M ☉ is concentrated in the inner nebula and is moving outward at a velocity of 53 ± 4 km s -1 ( D = 600 pc assumed). In order to explain the observed morphology of the inner nebula, a new colliding winds model is derived, which includes the effects of orbital motion (CWo model). Orbital effects cannot be ignored in AG Pegasi since the orbital timescale (2.25 yr; Meinunger 1981) is short compared to the likely timescale of wind collision (symbiotic nova eruption beginning ~1850; Merrill 1959). When these effects are considered, the interaction front between binary stellar winds is wrapped into spiral walls whose density decreases outward with 1/ r 2 . Distinctive geometries are found to arise depending on which wind dominates the interaction, the late-type wind from the symbiotic "cool component," or the high-velocity wind from the "hot component." Application of the CWo model to AG Peg suggests that the observed transient lobe enhancements of the inner nebula arise due to changes in the mass-loss rate from the hot component. Hot component mass-loss rates ranging between 2.1 and 6.0 × 10 -8 M ☉ yr -1 are derived. The model is also successful in reproducing the radio spectrum of the central unresolved object of the system. A position angle of -15° ± 10° is inferred for the orbital pole as projected on the plane of the sky.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".