Gemini observations of Wolf-Rayet stars in the Local Group starburst galaxy IC 10
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present Gemini-N GMOS and CFHT MOS spectroscopy of Wolf-Rayet candidates in the Local Group dwarf galaxy IC 10 that were previously identified by Massey et al. and Royer et al. From the present spectroscopic survey, the WC/WN ratio for IC 10 remains unusually high, given its low metallicity, although none of the WC9 stars suspected from narrow-band imaging are confirmed. Our spectroscopy confirms 9 newly discovered Wolf-Rayet candidates from Royer et al., whilst spectral types of 14 Wolf-Rayet stars previously observed by Massey & Armandroff are refined here. In total, there are 26 spectroscopically confirmed Wolf-Rayet stars in IC 10. All but one of the fourteen WC stars are WC4–6 stars, the exception being # 10 from Massey et al., a broad-lined, apparently single WC7 star. There are a total of eleven WN stars, which are predominantly early WN3–4 stars, but include a rare WN10 star, #8 from Royer et al. #5 from Massey et al. is newly identified as a transition WN/C star. Consequently, the WC/WN ratio for IC10 is 14/11~1.3, unusually high for a metal-poor galaxy. Re-evaluating recent photometric data of Massey & Holmes, we suggest that the true WC/WN ratio may not be as low as ~0.3. Finally, we present ground-based finding charts for all confirmed WR stars, plus HST/WFPC2 charts for twelve cases.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".