Pulsations of Complete Evolutionary Models for roAp Stars: Preliminary Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolutionary models described in the accompanying poster (Richard et al., these proceedings) have been tested for pulsations using both the adiabatic code developed by Brassard et al. (1992) and the corresponding non-adiabatic code as first used in Fontaine et al. (1994). For the stars of interest, these codes have the great advantages of being potentially able to treat atmospheric regions, as well as being numerically stable and efficient. The required derivatives were calculated by least-square fitting of spline functions to complete opacity tables constructed at each composition of the evolved model. Since there were some 1500 zones for each model, 1500 such tables were constructed and spline functions were fitted to each of them. They then gave directly the derivatives required for the pulsation calculations (see Fig. 1). Note that models equivalent to 1.70T5.3D1K-3 have already been tested for pulsations by Turcotte et al. (2000).
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".