HUNTING FOR THE PROGENITOR OF SN 1006: HIGH-RESOLUTION SPECTROSCOPIC SEARCH WITH THE FLAMES INSTRUMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type Ia supernovae play a significant role in the evolution of the universe and have a wide range of applications. It is widely believed that these events are the thermonuclear explosions of carbon–oxygen white dwarfs close to the Chandrasekhar mass (1.38 M ☉ ). However, CO white dwarfs are born with masses much below the Chandrasekhar limit and thus require mass accretion to become Type Ia supernovae. There are two main scenarios for accretion: first, the merger of two white dwarfs and, second, a stable mass accretion from a companion star. According to predictions, this companion star (also referred to as donor star) survives the explosion and thus should be visible in the center of Type Ia remnants. In this paper, we scrutinize the central stars (79 in total) of the SN 1006 remnant to search for the surviving donor star as predicted by this scenario. We find no star consistent with the traditional accretion scenario in SN 1006.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".