A preliminary look at the empirical mass distribution of hot B subdwarf stars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the results of about a decade of efforts toward building an empirical mass distribution for hot B subdwarf stars on the basis of asteroseismology. So far, our group has published detailed analyses pertaining to 16 pulsating B subdwarfs, including estimates of the masses of these pulsators. Given that measurements of the masses of B subdwarfs through more classical methods (such as full orbital solutions in binary stars) have remained far and few, asteroseismology has proven a tool of choice in this endeavor. On the basis of a first sample of 15 pulsators, we find a relatively sharp mass distribution with a mean mass of 0.470 M⊙, a median value of 0.470 M⊙, and a narrow range 0.441−0.499 M⊙ containing some 68.3% of the stars. We augmented our sample with the addition of seven stars (components of eclipsing binaries) with masses reliably established through light curve modeling and spectroscopy. The new distribution is very similar to the former one with a mean mass of 0.470 M⊙, a median value of 0.471 M⊙, and a slightly wider range 0.439−0.501 M⊙ containing some 68.3% of the stars. Although still based on small-number statistics, our derived empirical mass distribution compares qualitatively very well with the expectations of stellar evolution theory.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".