MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169425022 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slt151

Found: the progenitors of AM CVn and supernovae .Ia

2013· article· en· W2169425022 on OpenAlexaff
Mukremin Kilic, J. J. Hermes, A. Gianninas, Warren R. Brown, C. O. Heinke, Marcel A. Agüeros, P. Chote, D. J. Sullivan, Keaton J. Bell, Samuel T. Harrold

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsWhite dwarfSupernovaNeutron starAstronomyBinary numberStarsAccretion (finance)Mass ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present optical and X-ray observations of two tidally distorted, extremely low-mass white dwarfs (WDs) with massive companions. There is no evidence of neutron stars in our Chandra and XMM observations of these objects. SDSS J075141.18−014120.9 (J0751) is an eclipsing double WD binary containing a 0.19 M⊙ WD with a 0.97 M⊙ companion in a 1.9 h orbit. J0751 becomes the fifth eclipsing double WD system currently known. SDSS J174140.49+652638.7 (J1741) is another binary containing a 0.17 M⊙ WD with an unseen M ≥ 1.11 M⊙ WD companion in a 1.5-h orbit. With a mass ratio of ≈0.1, J1741 will have stable mass transfer through an accretion disc and turn into an interacting AM Canum Venaticorum (AM CVn) system in the next ≈160 Myr. With a mass ratio of 0.2, J0751 is likely to follow a similar evolutionary path. These are the first known AM CVn progenitor binary systems and they provide important constraints on the initial conditions for AM CVn. Theoretical studies suggest that both J0751 and J1741 may create thermonuclear supernovae in ∼108 yr, either .Ia or Ia. Such explosions can account for ∼1 per cent of the Type Ia supernova rate.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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

Citations63
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207