MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2741412388 · doi:10.1017/s1743921317002782

What can magnetic early B-type stars tell us about early B-type stars in general?

2016· article· en· W2741412388 on OpenAlexaff
M. E. Shultz, G. A. Wade, Th. Rivinius, C. Neiner, E. Alécian, V. Pétit, J. Grunhut

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarsPhysicsAstrophysicsMagnetic fieldPopulationAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Some magnetic early B-type stars display Hα emission originating in their Centrifugal Magnetospheres (CMs). To determine the rotational and magnetic properties necessary for the onset of emission, we analyzed a large spectropolarimetric dataset for a sample of 51 B5-B0 magnetic stars. New rotational periods were found for 15 stars. We determined physical parameters, dipolar magnetic field strengths, magnetospheric parameters, and magnetic braking timescales. Hα-bright stars are more rapidly rotating, more strongly magnetized, and younger than the overall population. We use the high sensitivity of magnetic braking to the mass-loss rate to test the predictions of Vink et al. (2001) and Krtička (2014) by comparing agestto maximum spindown agestS, max. For stars withM*< 10M⊙this comparison favours the Krtička recipe. For the most massive stars, both prescriptions yieldt≪tS, max, a discrepancy which is difficult to explain via incorrect mass-loss rates alone.

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)0.011
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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