MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2121885109 · doi:10.1086/504634

Discovery of the New Slowly Pulsating B Star HD 163830 (B5 II/III) from <i>MOST</i> Space-based Photometry

2006· article· en· W2121885109 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Aerts, P. De Cat, R. Kuschnig, J. M. Matthews, D. B. Guenther, A. F. J. Moffat, S. M. Ruciński, Dimitar Sasselov, G. A. H. Walker, W. W. Weiß

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalSaint Mary's UniversitySt. Mary's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space AgencyKU LeuvenAustrian Science Fund
KeywordsPhysicsPhotometry (optics)StarsAmplitudeAstrophysicsStar (game theory)AstronomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the discovery of a new slowly pulsating B star, with the largest number of detected frequencies to date by more than a factor of 3, based on 37 days of MOST ( Microvariability and Oscillations of STars ) satellite guide star photometry. The star HD 163830 ( V = 9.3, B5 II/III) varies in 20 detected frequencies in the range 0.035-1.06 day -1 (0.4-12.3 μHz) with amplitudes from 0.7 to 7.6 mmag (with a signal-to-noise ratio from 4 to 41). Eighteen of these frequencies are consistent with low-degree, high-order nonradial g -modes of seismic models of an evolved 4.5 M ☉ star. We are unable to identify one unique model due to lack of mode identifications. The lowest two frequencies may be associated with the rotation of HD 163830, but firm proof of this must await future spectroscopic data.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations44
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→