MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003780366

The colliding winds of WR 146 - seeing the work.

2005· article· en· W3003780366 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Evan O’Connor, S. M. Dougherty, J. M. Pittard, P. M. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsStarsAstrophysicsCollisionEmission spectrumVery-long-baseline interferometryAstronomyThermal windProper motionSpectral lineElectromagnetic spectrumWind speedMeteorologyWind profile power lawOptics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WR146 is a WC6+O8 colliding-wind binary (CWB) system with thermal emission from the stellar winds of the two stars, and bright non-thermal emission from the wind-collision region (WCR) where the winds collide. We present high resolution radio observations from 1.4 to 43 GHz that give one of the best quality radio spectra of any CWB to date. Observations at 22 GHz now span 8 years, and reveal the proper motion of the system, allowing comparison of multi-epoch data. VLBI observations show the location of the WCR relative to the stellar components, from which the wind momentum ratio can be shown to be η = 0.06±0.15. The radio spectrum and the spatial distribution of emission are modelled, and we determine the contribution of both stellar winds and the WCR to the observed emission. We show that our current models fail to account for the high frequency spectrum of WR146, and also produce too much emission far from the stagnation point of the wind collision.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Astronomical Society of CanadaSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207