On the Enhancement of Mass Loss in Cepheids Due to Radial Pulsation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An analytical derivation is presented for computing mass-loss rates of Cepheids by using the method of Castor, Abbott, and Klein modified to include a term for momentum input from pulsation and shocks generated in the atmosphere. Using this derivation, mass-loss rates of Cepheids are determined as a function of stellar parameters. When applied to a set of known Cepheids, the calculated mass-loss rates range from 10 −10 to 10 −7 M ☉ yr −1 , larger than if the winds were driven by radiation alone. Infrared excesses based on the predicted mass-loss rates are compared to observations from optical interferometry and IRAS , and predictions are made for Spitzer observations. The mass-loss rates are consistent with the observations, within the uncertainties of each. The rate of period change of Cepheids is discussed and shown to relate to mass loss, albeit the dependence is very weak. There is also a correlation between the large mass-loss rates and the Cepheids with slowest absolute rate of period change due to evolution through the instability strip. The enhanced mass loss helps illuminate the issue of infrared excess and the mass discrepancy found in Cepheids.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".