MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098872042

CONSTRAINTS ON THE COMPACT OBJECT MASS IN THE ECLIPSING HIGH-MASS X-RAY BINARY XMMU J013236.7+303228 IN M 33

2016· article· en· W3098872042 on OpenAlexaff
V. Bhalerao, M. H. van Kerkwijk, Fiona A. Harrison

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsNeutron starRoche lobeRADIUSLuminosityX-ray binaryOrbital periodRadial velocityMillisecond pulsarPulsarBinary starEffective temperatureX-ray pulsarStarsGalaxy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present optical spectroscopic measurements of the eclipsing high-mass X-ray binary (HMXB) XMMU J013236.7+303228 in M 33. Based on spectra taken at multiple epochs of the 1.73 day binary orbital period we determine physical as well as orbital parameters for the donor star. We find the donor to be a B1.5IV subgiant with effective temperature T = 22,000–23,000 K. From the luminosity, temperature, and known distance to M 33 we derive a radius of R = 8.9 ± 0.5 R. From the radial-velocity measurements, we determine a velocity semi-amplitude of Kopt = 63 ± 12 km s−1. Using the physical properties of the B star determined from the optical spectrum, we estimate the star’s mass to be Mopt = 11 ± 1 M. Based on the X-ray spectrum, the compact companion is likely a neutron star, although no pulsations have yet been detected. Using the spectroscopically derived B star mass we find the neutron star companion mass to be MX = 2.0 ± 0.4 M, consistent with the neutron star mass in the HMXB Vela X-1, but heavier than the canonical value of 1.4 M found for many millisecond pulsars. We attempt to use as an additional constraint that the B star radius inferred from temperature, flux, and distance should equate to the Roche radius, since the system accretes by Roche lobe overflow. This leads to substantially larger masses, but by trying to apply the technique to known systems, we find that the masses are consistently overestimated. Attempting to account for that in our uncertainties, we derive MX = 2.2+0.8−0.6 M and Mopt = 13 ± 4 M. We conclude that precise constraints require detailed modeling of the shape of the Roche surface.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207