MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2190919103 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/814/2/163

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FORMATION OF BLUE STRAGGLER STARS FROM<i>HST</i>ULTRAVIOLET OBSERVATIONS OF NGC 188

2015· article· en· W2190919103 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBlue stragglerPhotometry (optics)StarsWhite dwarfRoche lobeStar clusterGlobular clusterStar formationHertzsprung–Russell diagramHubble space telescope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results of a Hubble Space Telescope ( HST ) far-ultraviolet (FUV) survey searching for white dwarf (WD) companions to blue straggler stars (BSSs) in open cluster NGC 188. The majority of NGC 188 BSSs (15 of 21) are single-lined binaries with properties suggestive of mass-transfer formation via Roche lobe overflow, specifically through an asymptotic giant branch star transferring mass to a main sequence secondary, yielding a BSS binary with a WD companion. In NGC 188, a BSS formed by this mechanism within the past 400 Myr will have a WD companion that is hot and luminous enough to be directly detected as a FUV photometric excess with HST . Comparing expected BSS FUV emission to observed photometry reveals four BSSs with WD companions above 12,000 K (younger than 250 Myr) and three WD companions with temperatures between 11,000 and 12,000 K. These BSS+WD binaries all formed through recent mass transfer. The location of the young BSSs in an optical color–magnitude diagram (CMD) indicates that distance from the zero-age main sequence does not necessarily correlate with BSS age. There is no clear CMD separation between mass transfer-formed BSSs and those likely formed through other mechanisms, such as collisions. The seven detected WD companions place a lower limit on the mass-transfer formation frequency of 33%. We consider other possible formation mechanisms by comparing properties of the BSS population to theoretical predictions. We conclude that 14 BSS binaries likely formed from mass transfer, resulting in an inferred mass-transfer formation frequency of approximately 67%.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations79
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207