MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052424564 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/20134304005

Asteroseismology of hot B subdwarf stars

2013· article· en· W2052424564 on OpenAlexaff
S. Charpinet, V. Van Grootel, P. Brassard, G. Fontaine, E.M. Green, S. K. Randall

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsteroseismologyStarsSubdwarfPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyHorizontal branchWhite dwarfStellar evolutionMetallicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-radial pulsations in Extreme Horizontal Branch stars (also known as hot B subdwarfs or sdB stars) offer strong opportunities to study, through asteroseismology, the structure and internal dynamics of stars in this intermediate stage of stellar evolution. Most sdB stars directly descend from former red giants and are expected to evolve straight into white dwarfs after core helium exhaustion. They thus represent the most direct link between these two stages. Their properties should therefore reflect both the outcome of the core evolution of red giant stars and the initial state for a fraction of the white dwarfs. We review the status of this field after a decade of efforts to exploit both p-mode and g-mode pulsating sdB stars as asteroseismic laboratories. From the discoveries of these two classes of pulsators in 1997 and 2003, respectively, up to the current epoch of data gathering of unprecedented quality from space, a lot of progress has been made in this area and prospects for future achievements look very promising.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.231
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207