Evolutionary Synthesis Models of Young Star‐forming Regions: The Influence of Binary Stars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of massive close binary systems on observable properties of young star-forming regions with an age smaller than ~40 Myr is evaluated using the population synthesis code LavalSB. This code was developed in parallel with Starburst99. Evolutionary tracks for the binary stars included in LavalSB result from an adaptation of the tracks produced by de Loore & Vanbeveren. These tracks have been modified to be consistent with the single-star evolutionary tracks from the Geneva group, which are already included in LavalSB. Models for various stellar populations with different metallicities are presented, using mainly a frequency of massive close binary systems equal to 30% and considering that binary stars with an initial mass larger than 40 M ☉ do not undergo a Roche lobe overflow. For stellar populations younger than 5 Myr, we confirm that the effect of binary systems is negligible. For populations older than 5 Myr, the number of O and Wolf-Rayet stars, the high-energy continuum flux, and the energy deposition rate by the stellar winds into the interstellar medium are affected by the presence of binary systems. On the other hand, the strength and shape of the ultraviolet lines, the magnitudes, the colors, the supernova rate, and the mass deposition rate in the interstellar medium are not significantly changed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".