MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pulsational instabilities in the hot sdO star SDSS J1600+0748: The key role of radiative levitation

2009· article· en· W2022577610 on OpenAlexaff
G. Fontaine, P. Brassard, E M Green, P. Chayer, S. Charpinet, Morten Andersen, J. Portouw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsPhysicsRadiative transferMetallicityLevitationStarsOpacityLuminosityStar (game theory)Optics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SDSS J1600+0748 is the only hot sdO star for which unambiguous multiperiodic luminosity variations have been reported so far. These rapid variations, with periods in the range from 60 s to 120 s, are best qualitatively explained in terms of pulsational instabilities, but the exact nature of the driving mechanism has remained a puzzle. Models of sdO stars with uniform metallicity, even those with artificially-boosted values of the metallicity Z , are unable to excite pulsation modes in the range of interest as demonstrated most eloquently by Cristina Rodríguez-López in her Ph.D. thesis at the Universidad de Vigo in 2007. We confirm her results here, but also show that the inclusion of radiative levitation in the equilibrium models changes the picture dramatically. We find indeed that p -mode pulsations with periods overlapping with the observed ones in SDSS J1600+0748 can be excited in models in which radiative levitation of iron is taken into account. This process provides the needed boost to the opacity driving mechanism. We conclude that radiative levitation is a likely essential ingredient in the excitation physics at work in this unique star.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207