MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006696011 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/718/2/l97

EARLY ASTEROSEISMIC RESULTS FROM <i>KEPLER</i> : STRUCTURAL AND CORE PARAMETERS OF THE HOT B SUBDWARF KPD 1943+4058 AS INFERRED FROM <i>g</i> -MODE OSCILLATIONS

2010· article· en· W2006696011 on OpenAlexaff
V. Van Grootel, S. Charpinet, G. Fontaine, P. Brassard, E. M. Green, S. K. Randall, R. Silvotti, R. H. Østensen, H. Kjeldsen, J. Christensen‐Dalsgaard, W. J. Borucki, David Koch

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersScience Mission DirectorateCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSubdwarfAstrophysicsPhysicsRADIUSLight curveStarsMode (computer interface)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a seismic analysis of the pulsating hot B subdwarf KPD 1943+4058 (KIC 005807616) on the basis of the long-period, gravity-mode pulsations recently uncovered by Kepler. This is the first time that g-mode seismology can be exploited quantitatively for stars on the extreme horizontal branch, all previous successful seismic analyses having been confined so far to short-period, p-mode pulsators. We demonstrate that current models of hot B subdwarfs can quite well explain the observed g-mode periods, while being consistent with independent constraints provided by spectroscopy. We identify the 18 pulsations retained in our analysis as low-degree (l = 1 and 2), intermediate-order (k = –9 through –58) g-modes. The periods (frequencies) are recovered, on average, at the 0.22% level, which is comparable to the best results obtained for p-mode pulsators. We infer the following structural and core parameters for KPD 1943+4058 (formal fitting uncertainties only): T eff = 28,050 ± 470 K, log g = 5.52 ± 0.03, M * = 0.496 ± 0.002 M ☉, log (M env/M *) = –2.55 ± 0.07, log (1 – M core/M *) = –0.37 ± 0.01, and X core(C+O) = 0.261 ± 0.008. We additionally derive the age of the star since the zero-age extended horizontal branch 18.4 ± 1.0 Myr, the radius R = 0.203 ± 0.007 R ☉, the luminosity L = 22.9 ± 3.13 L ☉, the absolute magnitude MV = 4.21 ± 0.11, the reddening index E(B – V) = 0.094 ± 0.017, and the distance d = 1180 ± 95 pc.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations94
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207