MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013798962 · doi:10.1086/521209

The Thermal Structure of the Circumstellar Disk Surrounding the Classical Be Star γ Cassiopeiae

2007· article· en· W2013798962 on OpenAlexaff
T. A. A. Sigut, C. E. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHydrostatic equilibriumAstrophysicsThermalEnvelope (radar)Radiative transferRadiative equilibriumCircumstellar envelopeHydrogenRadiative coolingThermal equilibriumChemical compositionStar (game theory)IonThermodynamicsStarsAstronomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have computed radiative equilibrium models for the gas in the circumstellar envelope surrounding the hot, classical Be star γ Cassiopeiae. This calculation is performed using a code that incorporates a number of improvements over previous treatments of the disk's thermal structure by Millar & Marlborough and Jones et al.; most importantly, heating and cooling rates are computed with atomic models for H, He, CNO, Mg, Si, Ca, and Fe and their relevant ions. Thus, for the first time, the thermal structure of a Be disk is computed for a gas with a solar chemical composition as opposed to assuming a pure hydrogen envelope. We compare the predicted average disk temperature, the total energy loss in Hα, and the near-IR excess with observations and find that all can be accounted for by a disk that is in vertical hydrostatic equilibrium with a density in the equatorial plane of ρ( R ) ≈ (3-5) × 10 -11 ( R / R * ) -2.5 g cm -3 . We also discuss the changes in the disk's thermal structure that result from the additional heating and cooling processes available to a gas with a solar chemical composition over those available to a pure hydrogen plasma.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations103
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207