MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2317934229 · doi:10.1017/s174392131102792x

An Unexpected Outcome from Disentangling

2011· article· en· W2317934229 on OpenAlexaff
P. Chadima, P. Harmanec, PB Bennett, Shan Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaSaint Mary's University
FundersSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryGrantová Agentura České Republiky
KeywordsSpectral lineAstrophysicsPhysicsTable (database)AstronomyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During our recent spectroscopic study of ε Aur (Chadima et al. 2011), we made an attempt to detect weak spectral lines of the secondary, hidden in a dark disk, using the spectral disentangling technique of Simon & Sturm (1994) and Hadrava (1995, 1997, 2004). We used the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory (DAO) and Ondřejov (OND) red electronic spectra, which cover more than one half of the orbital period. To our surprise, two different programs that disentangled the spectrum in Fourier space, KOREL (Hadrava 1995, 2004) and FDBINARY (Ilijić et al. 2001), both yielded apparently good, similar reconstructions of two well-defined spectra for mass ratios near unity. The results (Solution 1) are shown in Fig. 1 (left panels) and Table 1 (left column). This result is hard to accept as real given the existing knowledge about the system: ε Aur is an F-type star with an unseen companion embedded in a cool, dark disk (temperature ~ 500–600 K). A detailed search for any trace of spectral signatures of the secondary in the spectra was carried out (see Bennett et al., these proceedings). Although they found line profile variations that were correlated with orbital phase, these variations were not consistent with the presence of a secondary.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→