MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084877668 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/149/2/49

TIME SEQUENCE SPECTROSCOPY OF AW UMa. THE 518 nm Mg I TRIPLET REGION ANALYZED WITH BROADENING FUNCTIONS

2015· article· en· W3084877668 on OpenAlexaff
S. M. Ruciński

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsBinary numberContact binarySpectroscopyRotation (mathematics)Accretion (finance)Spectral lineMass ratioPrimary componentBinary starGeometryAstronomyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High resolution spectroscopic observations of AW UMa, obtained on three consecutive nights with the median time resolution of 2.1 minutes, have been analyzed using the Broadening Functions method in the spectral window Doppler images of the system reveal the presence of vigorous mass motions within the binary system; their presence puts into question the solid-body rotation assumption of the contact binary model. AW UMa appears to be a very tight, semi-detached binary; the mass transfer takes place from the more massive to the less massive component. The primary, a fast-rotating star with V sin i = 181.4+\-2.5 km s^-1, is covered by inhomogeneities: very slowly drifting spots and a dense network of ripples more closely participating in its rotation. The spectral lines of the primary show an additional broadening component (called the "pedestal") which originates either in the equatorial regions which rotate faster than the rest of the star by about 50 km s^-1 or in an external disk-like structure. The secondary component appears to be smaller than predicted by the contact model. The radial velocity field around the secondary is dominated by accretion of matter transferred from (and possibly partly returned to) the primary component. The parameters of the binary are: A sin i = 2.73 +/- 0.11 R_odot and M_1 sin^3 i = 1.29 +/- 0.15 M_odot, M_2 sin^3 i = 0.128 +/- 0.016 M_odot. The mass ratio q_rm sp = M_2/M_1 = 0.099 +/- 0.003, while still the most uncertain among the spectroscopic elements, is substantially different from the previous numerous and mutually consistent photometric investigations which were based on the contact model. It should be studied why photometry and spectroscopy give so very discrepant results and whether AW UMa is an unusual object or that only very high-quality spectroscopy can reveal the true nature of W UMa-type binaries.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207