MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2765930817 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2813

Polarization light curve modelling of corotating interaction regions in the wind of the Wolf–Rayet star WR 6

2017· article· en· W2765930817 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole St‐Louis, Patrick Tremblay, Richard Ignace

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsLight curveOrbital inclinationPolarization (electrochemistry)Wolf–Rayet starBe starPolarimetryStarsSkyScatteringComputational physicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intriguing WN4b star WR 6 has been known to display epoch-dependent spectroscopic, photometric and polarimetric variability for several decades. In this paper, we set out to verify if a simplified analytical model in which corotating interaction regions (CIRs) threading an otherwise spherical wind is able to reproduce the many broad-band continuum light curves from the literature with a reasonable set of parameters. We modified the optically thin model developed by Ignace, St-Louis & Proulx-Giraldeau to approximately account for multiple scattering and used it to fit 13 separate data sets of this star. By including two CIRs in the wind, we obtained reasonable fits for all data sets with coherent values for the inclination of the rotation axis (i0 = 166°) and for its orientation in the plane of the sky, although in the latter case we obtained two equally acceptable values (ψ = 63° and 152°) from the polarimetry. Additional line profile variation simulations using the Sobolev approximation for the line transfer allowed us to eliminate the ψ = 152° solution. With the adopted configuration (i0 = 166° and ψ = 63°), we were able to reproduce all data sets relatively well with two CIRs located near the stellar equator and always separated by ∼90° in longitude. The epoch dependence comes from the fact that these CIRs migrate along the surface of the star. Density contrasts smaller than a factor of 2 and large opening angles for the CIR (⁠|$\beta \gtrapprox 35^{\circ}$|⁠) were found to best reproduce the type of spectroscopic variability reported in the literature.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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