MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2154657235 · doi:10.1017/s1743921314001781

Chemical peculiarities in magnetic and non-magnetic pre-main sequence A and B stars

2013· article· en· W2154657235 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarsHerbig Ae/Be starT Tauri starMain sequenceK-type main-sequence starSequence (biology)Star (game theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In A- and late B-type stars, strong magnetic fields are always associated with Ap and Bp chemical peculiarities. However, it is not clear at what point in a star's evolution those peculiarities develop. Strong magnetic fields have been observed in pre-main sequence A and B stars (Herbig Ae and Be stars), and these objects have been proposed to be the progenitors of Ap and Bp stars. However, the photospheric chemical abundances of these magnetic Herbig stars have not been studied carefully, and furthermore the chemical abundances of 'normal' non-magnetic Herbig stars remain poorly characterized. To investigate this issue, we have studied the photospheric compositions of 23 Herbig stars, four of which have confirmed magnetic fields. Surprisingly, we found that half the non-magnetic stars in our sample show λ Bootis chemical peculiarities to varying degrees. For the stars with detected magnetic fields, we find one chemically normal star, one star with λ Boo peculiarities, one star displaying weak Ap/Bp peculiarities, and one somewhat more evolved star with somewhat stronger Ap/Bp peculiarities. These results suggests that Ap/Bp peculiarities are preceded by magnetic fields, and that these peculiarities develop over the pre-main sequence lives of A and B stars. The incidence of λ Boo stars we find is much higher than that seen on the main sequence. We argue that a selective accretion model for the formation of λ Boo peculiarities is a natural explanation for this remarkably large incidence.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→