MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Period-luminosity relations for red supergiant variables -- I.The calibration

2000· article· en· W1994006188 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Pierce, J. S. Jurcevic, Dennis R. Crabtree

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical ObservatoryHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPhotometry (optics)SupergiantAstrophysicsLarge Magellanic CloudAstronomyRed supergiantLuminosityAmplitudeGalaxyOpticsStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present CCD photometry of red supergiant long-period variables (LPVs) in the Per OB1 association, the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) and M33. The photometry was obtained in the Kron-Cousins R and I bandpasses and in a narrow bandpass (λ0=8250 Å, FWHM=300 Å) chosen to avoid TiO bands in the spectral energy distribution of the LPVs. Because the strength of the TiO bands varies greatly with temperature, which varies with the phase of an LPV, avoiding TiO reduces the amplitude of the photometric variations seen in LPVs. The result is a lower dispersion and a well defined period-luminosity (PL) relation. For the LMC sample we find an rms dispersion of 0.27 mag in the narrow-band PL relation and slightly larger dispersions for the LPVs in Per OB1 and M33. This dispersion is comparable to that of the Cepheid PL relation at similar wavelengths. Adopting a distance modulus of 18.5±0.1 mag for the LMC, we obtain distance moduli of 11.68±0.15 mag for Per OB1 and 24.85±0.13 mag for M33. These distances agree well with those based on main sequence fitting for Per OB1 and the Cepheid distance for M33. Since LPVs are ∼ 5 times more common than Cepheids and have a well defined PL relation, LPVs provide a promising method for estimating Galactic and extra galactic distances.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations56
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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