MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067845723 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20021781

Photospheric radius expansion X-ray bursts as standard candles

2003· article· en· W2067845723 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmic distance ladderLuminosityRADIUSGlobular clusterEddington luminosityCritical radiusPhotosphereApparent magnitude

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the maximum bolometric peak luminosities during type I X-ray bursts from the persistent or transient luminous X-ray sources in globular clusters. We show that for about two thirds of the sources the maximum peak luminosities during photospheric radius expansion X-ray bursts extend to a critical value of erg s-1, assuming the total X-ray burst emission is entirely due to black-body radiation and the recorded maximum luminosity is the actual peak luminosity. This empirical critical luminosity is consistent with the Eddington luminosity limit for hydrogen poor material. Since the critical luminosity is more or less always reached during photospheric radius expansion X-ray bursts (except for one source), such bursts may be regarded as empirical standard candles. However, because significant deviations do occur, our standard candle is only accurate to within 15%. We re-evaluated the distances to the twelve globular clusters in which the X-ray bursters reside.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
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 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

Citations393
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207