MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2932069636 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4273

Constraining Mass-transfer Histories of Blue Straggler Stars with COS Spectroscopy of White Dwarf Companions

2019· article· en· W2932069636 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsWhite dwarfBlue stragglerStarsOpen clusterCluster (spacecraft)Accretion (finance)SpectroscopyStar clusterBinary number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent studies show that the majority of blue straggler stars (BSSs) in old open clusters are formed through mass transfer from an evolved star onto a main-sequence companion, resulting in a BSS and white dwarf (WD) in a binary system. We present constraints on the mass transfer histories of two BSS–WD binaries in the open cluster NGC 188, using WD temperatures and surface gravities measured with Hubble Space Telescope COS far-ultraviolet spectroscopy. Adopting a Gaia-based cluster distance of 1847 ± 107 pc, we determine that one system, WOCS 4540, formed through Case C mass transfer resulting in a CO-core WD with T eff = K and a log g = , corresponding to a mass of M ⊙ and a cooling age of Myr. The other system, WOCS 5379, formed through Case B mass transfer resulting in a He-core WD with T eff = K and a log g = , corresponding to a mass of M ⊙ and an age of Myr. The WD parameters are consistent across four different cluster distance assumptions. We determine possible progenitor binary systems with a grid of accretion models using MESA, and investigate whether these systems would lead to stable or unstable mass transfer. WOCS 4540 likely resulted from stable mass transfer during periastron passage in an eccentric binary system, while WOCS 5379 challenges our current understanding of the expected outcomes for mass transfer from red giant branch stars. Both systems are examples of the value in using detailed analyses to fine-tune our physical understanding of binary evolutionary processes.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→