MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2428098429 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1415

To<i>v</i><sub>∞</sub>and beyond! The He i absorption variability across the 2014.6 periastron passage of η Carinae

2016· article· en· W2428098429 on OpenAlexaff
Noel D. Richardson, Thomas Madura, Lucas St-Jean, A. F. J. Moffat, T. R. Gull, Christopher M. P. Russell, A. Damineli, M. Teodoro, M. F. Corcoran, F. M. Walter, Nicola Clementel, J. H. Groh, Kenji Hamaguchi, D. J. Hillier

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsTelescopeSpectrographAbsorption (acoustics)AstronomySpectral lineOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have monitored the massive binary star η Carinae with the CTIO/Small and Moderate Aperture Research Telescope System 1.5 m telescope and CHIRON spectrograph from the previous apastron passage of the system through the recent 2014.6 periastron passage. Our monitoring has resulted in a large, homogeneous data set with an unprecedented time-sampling, spectral resolving power, and signal to noise. This allowed us to investigate temporal variability previously unexplored in the system and discover a kinematic structure in the P Cygni absorption troughs of neutral helium wind lines. The features observed occurred prior to the periastron passage and are seen as we look through the trailing arm of the wind–wind collision shock cone. We show that the bulk of the variability is repeatable across the last five periastron passages, and that the absorption occurs in the inner 230 au of the system. In addition, we found an additional, high-velocity absorption component superimposed on the P Cygni absorption troughs that has been previously unobserved in these lines, but which bears resemblance to the observations of the He i λ10830 Å feature across previous cycles. Through a comparison of the current smoothed particle hydrodynamical simulations, we show that the observed variations are likely caused by instabilities in the wind–wind collision region in our line of sight, coupled with stochastic variability related to clumping in the winds.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→