MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142191033 · doi:10.1086/499916

Identification of the Red Supergiant Progenitor of Supernova 2005cs: Do the Progenitors of Type II‐P Supernovae Have Low Mass?

2006· article· en· W2142191033 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Weidong Li, Schuyler D. Van Dyk, A. V. Filippenko, Jean‐Charles Cuillandre, Saurabh W. Jha, J. S. Bloom, Adam G. Riess, Mario Livio

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRed supergiantSupernovaPhysicsAstrophysicsSupergiantAdvanced Camera for SurveysStarsPhotometry (optics)AstronomyGalaxyBrightnessHubble space telescope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stars that end their lives as supernovae (SNe) have been directly observed in only a handful of cases, due mainly to the extreme difficulty in identifying them in images obtained prior to the SN explosions. Here we report the identification of the progenitor for the recent Type II-plateau (core-collapse) SN 2005cs in pre-explosion archival images of the Whirlpool Galaxy (M51) obtained with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS). From high-quality ground-based images of the SN from the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope, we precisely determine the position of the SN and are able to isolate the SN progenitor to within 0".04 in the HST/ACS optical images. We further pinpoint the SN location to within 0".005 from HST/ACS ultraviolet images of the SN, confirming our progenitor identification. From photometry of the SN progenitor obtained with the pre-SN ACS images, and also limits to its brightness in pre-SN HST/NICMOS images, we infer that the progenitor is a red supergiant star of spectral type K0--M3, with initial mass 7--9 Msun. We also discuss the implications of the SN 2005cs progenitor identification and its mass estimate. There is an emerging trend that the most common Type II-plateau SNe originate from low-mass supergiants 8--15 Msun.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations161
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207