THEORETICAL<i>p</i>-MODE OSCILLATION FREQUENCIES FOR THE RAPIDLY ROTATING δ SCUTI STAR α OPHIUCHI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A rotating, two-dimensional stellar model is evolved to match the approximate conditions of α Oph. Both axisymmetric and nonaxisymmetric oscillation frequencies are computed for two-dimensional rotating models which approximate the properties of α Oph. These computed frequencies are compared to the observed frequencies. Oscillation calculations are made assuming the eigenfunction can be fitted with six Legendre polynomials, but comparison calculations with eight Legendre polynomials show the frequencies agree to within about 0.26% on average. The surface horizontal shape of the eigenfunctions for the two sets of assumed number of Legendre polynomials agrees less well, but all calculations show significant departures from that of a single Legendre polynomial. It is still possible to determine the large separation, although the small separation is more complicated to estimate. With the addition of the nonaxisymmetric modes with | m | ⩽ 4, the frequency space becomes sufficiently dense that it is difficult to comment on the adequacy of the fit of the computed to the observed frequencies. While the nonaxisymmetric frequency mode splitting is no longer uniform, the frequency difference between the frequencies for positive and negative values of the same m remains 2 m times the rotation rate.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".