KIC 2568888: To Be or Not to Be a Binary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In cases where both components of a binary system show oscillations, asteroseismology has been proposed as a method to identify the system. For KIC 2568888, observed with Kepler, we detect oscillation modes for two red giants in a single power-density spectrum. Through an asteroseismic study we investigate if the stars have similar properties, which could be an indication that they are physically bound into a binary system. While one star lies on the red giant branch (RGB), the other, more evolved star, is either a RGB or asymptotic giant branch star. We found similar ages for the red giants and a mass ratio close to 1. Based on these asteroseismic results, we propose KIC 2568888 as a rare candidate binary system (∼0.1% chance). However, when combining the asteroseismic data with ground-based BVI photometry we estimated different distances for the stars, which we cross-checked with Gaia DR2. From Gaia we obtained for one object a distance between and broadly consistent with the distances from BVI photometry. For the other object we have a negative parallax with a not yet reliable Gaia distance solution. The derived distances challenge a binary interpretation and may either point to a triple system, which could explain the visible magnitudes, or, to a rare chance alignment (∼0.05% chance based on stellar magnitudes). This probability would even be smaller, if calculated for close pairs of stars with a mass ratio close to unity in addition to similar magnitudes, which may indeed indicate that a binary scenario is more favorable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".