Oscillations in the Massive Wolf-Rayet Star WR 123 with the <i>M</i> <i>O</i> <i>S</i> <i>T</i> Satellite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the results of intensive visual-broadband photometric monitoring of the highly variable WN8 Wolf-Rayet star WR 123, obtained by the M O S T ( Microvariability and Oscillations of S T ars ) satellite. This first Canadian astronomical space telescope observed WR 123 for 38 days nonstop during 2004 June and July. Fourier analysis shows that no periodic signal is stable for more than several days in the low-frequency domain ( f < 1 day -1 ), where most of the stochastic power is contained. Also, no significant variability is seen in the high-frequency domain (10 day -1 < f < 1400 day -1 ) down to the level of 0.2 mmag, an order of magnitude lower than theoretical predictions for strange-mode pulsations. On the other hand, there seems to be a relatively stable 9.8 hr periodic signal present throughout the whole run. This period is probably too short to represent the axial rotation of the star, unless it is related to multiple substructures equidistantly spread along the stellar equator. It is also too short to be orbital in nature; it is more likely to be related to pulsational instablilities (although with a much longer period than expected), thus finally revealing a possible fundamental driver behind the highly variable wind of this object, and others of similar type.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".