Radial velocity mapping of Paczyński's star AW UMa: not a contact binary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present 2D (radial velocity, orbital phase) spectroscopic results for the very low mass-ratio close binary AW UMa which strongly indicate that the spectroscopic mass ratio (qsp= 0.10) does not agree with the photometrically derived one and that the widely adopted contact binary model appears to experience serious inconsistencies and limitations for this object. AW UMa is compared with V566 Oph (qsp= 0.26) which we found to behave according to the contact model. Observed broadening functions of AW UMa can be interpreted by a very strong limb darkening and/or non-solid-body rotation of the dominant primary component; the former assumption is unphysical while the differential rotation is not supported by an apparent stability of localized, dark features on the outer side of the primary. There are indications of the existence of an equatorial belt encompassing the whole system. All deficiencies in the interpretation and the discrepancy between the photometric and spectroscopic mass ratio of AW UMa can be solved within a new model of AW UMa where both components are detached and the system is submerged in a stream of hot, optically thick matter which mimics the stellar contact. While the masses and their ratio are correctly given by spectroscopy, the photometric picture is heavily modified by the matter engulfing both stars in the equatorial plane.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".