UNDERSTANDING COMPACT OBJECT FORMATION AND NATAL KICKS. II. THE CASE OF XTE J1118 + 480
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, an increasing number of proper motions have been measured for Galactic X-ray binaries. When supplemented with accurate determinations of the component masses, orbital period, and donor effective temperature, these kinematical constraints harbor a wealth of information on the system's past evolution. Here, we consider all this available information to reconstruct the full evolutionary history of the black hole X-ray binary XTE J1118 + 480, assuming that the system originated in the Galactic disk and the donor has solar metallicity. This analysis accounts for four evolutionary phases: mass transfer through the ongoing X-ray phase, tidal evolution before the onset of Roche lobe overflow, motion through the Galactic potential after the formation of the black hole, and binary orbital dynamics due to explosive mass loss and possibly a black hole natal kick at the time of core collapse. We find that right after black hole formation, the system consists of a ≃6.0–10.0 M ☉ black hole and a ≃1.0–1.6 M ☉ main-sequence star. We also find that that an asymmetric natal kick is not only plausible but required for the formation of this system, and derive a lower and upper limit on the black hole natal kick velocity magnitude of and , respectively.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".