Searching for Variability in the Globular Cluster Messier 4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time-series data taken with the Hubble Space Telescope of a field six core radii (∼5') from the center of the globular cluster Messier 4, and covering a period of about 10 weeks in early 2001, have been analyzed in search of variable objects. Various criteria were employed to select candidate variable stars. Period searches were performed on the selected candidates using phase dispersion minimization (PDM). The reliability of the PDM search results was tested using synthetic light curves of eclipsing binary stars and sinusoidal light curves of different periods. Results from this analysis showed that there are probably no eclipsing binary stars or periodic variables in our field with periods on the order of a few hours to a few days, down to limiting magnitudes of V ∼ 25 and I ∼ 24, which is consistent with the absence of contact binaries such as W Ursae Majoris systems. However, one candidate variable star does show an increase in brightness of ∼0.1 mag in both bandpasses, which seems to last for a few days. Possible explanations concerning the nature of this object include a binary system with a white dwarf primary and a low-mass main-sequence secondary or a BY Draconis variable star. We are able to set an upper limit to the observed fraction of photometric variability in this data set of 0.05%.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".