STUDIES OF VARIABILITY IN PROTO-PLANETARY NEBULAE. II. LIGHT AND VELOCITY CURVE ANALYSES OF IRAS 22272+5435 AND 22223+4327
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have carried out a detailed observational study of the light, color, and velocity variations of two bright, carbon-rich proto-planetary nebulae, IRAS 22223+4327 and 22272+5435. The light curves are based upon our observations from 1994 to 2011, together with published data by Arkhipova and collaborators. They each display four significant periods, with primary periods for IRAS 22223+4327 and 22272+5435 being 90 and 132 days, respectively. For each of them, the ratio of secondary to primary period is 0.95, a value much different from that found in Cepheids, but which may be characteristic of post-asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars. Fewer significant periods are found in the smaller radial velocity data sets, but they agree with those of the light curves. The color curves generally mimic the light curves, with the objects reddest when faintest. A comparison in seasons when there exist contemporaneous light, color, and velocity curves reveals that the light and color curves are in phase, while the radial velocity curves are ∼0.25 P out of phase with the light curves. Thus they differ from what is seen in Cepheids, in which the radial velocity curve is 0.50 P out of phase with the light curve. Comparison of the observed periods and amplitudes with those of post-AGB pulsation models shows poor agreement, especially for the periods, which are much longer than predicted. These observational data, particularly the contemporaneous light, color, and velocity curves, provide an excellent benchmark for new pulsation models of cool stars in the post-AGB, proto-planetary nebula phase.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".