MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluating GAIA performances on eclipsing binaries. I. Orbits and stellar parameters for V505 Per, V570 Per and OO Peg

2001· preprint· en· W3098742588 on OpenAlexaff
U. Munari, T. Tomov, T. Zwitter, Josef Kallrath, E. F. Milone, P. M. Marrese, Federico Boschi, A. Prša, L. Tomasella, D. Del Moro

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2001
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)PhysicsAstrophysicsBinary numberAstronomyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The orbits and physical parameters of three detached, double-lined A-F eclipsing binaries have been derived combining H_P, V_T, B_T photometry from the Hipparcos/Tycho mission with 8500-8750 Ang ground-based spectroscopy, mimicking the photometric+spectroscopic observations that should be obtained by GAIA, the approved Cornerstone 6 mission by ESA. This study has two main objectives, namely (a) to derive reasonable orbits for a number of new eclipsing binaries and (b) to evaluate the expected performances by GAIA on eclipsing binaries and the accuracy achievable on the determination of fundamental stellar parameters like masses and radii. It is shown that a 1% precision in the basic stellar parameters can be achieved by GAIA on well observed detached eclipsing binaries provided that the spectroscopic observations are performed at high enough resolution. Other types of eclipsing binaries (including semi-detached and contact types) and different spectral types will be investigated in following papers along this series.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations20
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207