MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The double-lined spectroscopic binary HR 6046

2007· article· en· W2056761056 on OpenAlexaff
C. D. Scarfe, R. F. Griffin, R. E. M. Griffin

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsParallaxAstrophysicsPrimary (astronomy)Binary starAstronomyOrbital elementsBinary numberProper motionBinary systemStarsStar (game theory)Orbital motionStellar classificationOrbit (dynamics)Mass ratioClassical mechanicsAngular momentum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HR 6046 has long been known as a single-lined binary system, for which preliminary orbital solutions were given in the 1930s, but the nature of the secondary star in the system has to date appeared puzzling. The rather large masses which the component stars were once believed to possess caused much speculation that the secondary was a ‘collapsed star’, and the large mass function that was originally published encouraged determined, but unsuccessful, efforts to be made to resolve the system by optical interferometry. We have observed the system as a double-lined binary, and now present the orbit. We are unable to specify the exact nature of the secondary star, whose mass is only slightly less than that of the primary, but comparison with late-type standard spectra suggests that it is an evolved star, while the primary is a giant somewhat cooler than the published spectral type indicates. The Hipparcos parallax is consistent with such a model for the system, but it is possible that it is vitiated by the photocentric motion. Our new orbital elements and their improved level of precision show conclusively that the system is by no means as exotic as was once thought.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→