MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970359620 · doi:10.22444/ibvs.6266

RZ Comae - A W-Type Overcontact Eclipsing Binary

2019· article· en· W2970359620 on OpenAlexaff
R. Nelson, Kevin B. Alton

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Bulletin on Variable Stars · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical ObservatoryHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsBinary numberAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RZ Com (GSC 1990(GSC -2841) is a short period (P = 0.3385 d) W UMa-type binary system, type-W, which has had, over the years, two spectroscopic and numerous light curve studies. The various mass determinations show a large scatter. Here we present the results of new light curve and radial velocity observations, and a fresh analysis by the Wilson-Devinney 2003 code. We have been able to obtain a unified model for photometric five datasets, each used one or more filters. The main model parameters such as mass ratio, temperature, potential, and inclination were in close agreement, as were derived quantities such as mass, stellar radius, etc. Only the spot parameters differed, as one might expect. Further, we determined a distance estimate, r = 204 5 pc, in good agreement with the Gaia value of r = 203.1 3.7 pc. We also presented four new eclipse timings, performed a renewed period analysis attaining a LiTE fit. With that we determined a rate of intrinsic period change dP/dt = 3.86(2) 10 -8 days/year, and-assuming conservative processes-a rate of mass exchange dm1/dt = -4.1(3) 10 -8 M/year which means that the less massive star is losing mass to its companion.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation Bulletin on Variable StarsSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207