MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2541876591 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2769

The spectral variability of a sample of WC 9 stars on time-scales of days to weeks

2016· article· en· W2541876591 on OpenAlexaff
S. Desforges, Nicole St‐Louis, André-Nicolas Chené, A. de la Chevrotière, V. Hénault-Brunet

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsStarsFlux (metallurgy)Wolf–Rayet starLine (geometry)SkewnessSpectral lineO-type starAtmospheric sciencesAstronomyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a spectroscopic monitoring campaign of nine presumably single Wolf–Rayet (WR) stars, eight of type WC 9 and one WC 8d. We characterize their variability and search for clues to the mechanism responsible for the formation of dust in their wind. For seven out of eight WC 9s, we find a large-scale line-flux variability level of σ > 5–8 per cent. The only WC 8d star is variable at a level more comparable with those associated with wind clumping, σ = 2.2 per cent. The changes take place on a time-scale of days but in many cases, observing over longer time spans resulted in higher line-flux variability levels. The width of the substructures ranges from ∼150 to 300 km s−1, with the widest structures corresponding to stars with the highest variability amplitude. We searched for periodicities in integrated line quantities for C iii λ5696. Radial velocity changes are typically ∼20 km s−1 but never exceed 40 km s−1 and are anticorrelated with the skewness of the line, strongly suggesting that they do not correspond to a real movement of the star. No periodicity was found in these integrated quantities, except for WR 103. Therefore, a wind–wind collision in a close binary does not seem to be responsible for the short-term variability. We cannot, however, exclude that these stars are intermediate- to long-period binaries. We estimate that for periods up to a few years, the shock-cone resulting from wind collisions would be non-adiabatic and thus unstable. We suggest that this represents a viable mechanism to explain the spectroscopic variability.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations6
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→