MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028870418 · doi:10.1086/378798

Theoretical Considerations on the Properties of Accreting Millisecond Pulsars

2003· article· en· W2028870418 on OpenAlexaff
L. A. Nelson, S. Rappaport

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillisecond pulsarPhysicsAstrophysicsAccretion (finance)Angular momentumOrbital periodBinary numberMillisecondPulsarOrbital inclinationStarsAstronomyClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine a number of evolutionary scenarios for the recently discovered class of accretion-powered millisecond X-ray pulsars in ultracompact binaries, including XTE J0929-314 and XTE J1751-305, with orbital periods of 43.6 and 42.4 minutes, respectively. We focus on a particular scenario that can naturally explain the present-day properties of these systems. This model invokes a donor star that was either very close to the TAMS (i.e., main-sequence turnoff) at the onset of mass transfer or had sufficient time to evolve during the mass-transfer phase. We have run a systematic set of detailed binary evolution calculations with a wide range of initial donor masses and degrees of (nuclear) evolution at the onset of mass transfer. In general, the models whose evolutionary tracks result in the best fits to these ultracompact binaries start mass transfer with orbital periods of ~15 hr, then decrease to a minimum orbital period of less than or about 40 minutes, and finally evolve back up to about 43 minutes. We also carry out a probability analysis based on the measured mass functions of XTE J0929-314 and XTE J1751-305, and combine this with the results of our binary evolution models and find that the donor stars currently have masses in the range of about 0.012 - 0.025 solar masses, and radii of about 0.042 - 0.055 solar radii, and that these radii are likely to be factors of about 1.1 - 1.3 times larger than the corresponding zero-temperature ones. We also find that the interiors of the donors are largely composed of helium and that the surface hydrogen abundances are almost certainly less than 10% (by mass).

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations76
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207