MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284969413 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac69ce

NICER X-Ray Observations of Eta Carinae during Its Most Recent Periastron Passage

2022· article· en· W4284969413 on OpenAlexaff
David Espinoza-Galeas, M. F. Corcoran, Kenji Hamaguchi, Christopher M. P. Russell, T. R. Gull, A. F. J. Moffat, Noel D. Richardson, G. Weigelt, D. J. Hillier, A. Damineli, I. R. Stevens, Thomas Madura, Keith C. Gendreau, Z. Arzoumanian, Felipe Navarete

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsEjectaFlux (metallurgy)X-rayShock (circulatory)Bow shock (aerodynamics)AstronomyShock waveOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report high-precision X-ray monitoring observations in the 0.4–10 keV band of the luminous, long-period colliding wind binary Eta Carinae, up to and through its most recent X-ray minimum/periastron passage in 2020 February. Eta Carinae reached its observed maximum X-ray flux on 2020 January 7, at a flux level of 3.30 ×10−10 ergs s−1 cm−2, followed by a rapid plunge to its observed minimum flux, 0.03 × 10−10 ergs s−1 cm−2, near 2020 February 17. The NICER observations show an X-ray recovery from the minimum of only ∼16 days, the shortest X-ray minimum observed so far. We provide new constraints for the “deep” and “shallow” minimum intervals. Variations in the characteristic X-ray temperatures of the hottest observed X-ray emission indicate that the apex of the wind–wind “bow shock” enters the companion’s wind acceleration zone about 81 days before the start of the X-ray minimum. There is a steplike increase in column density just before the X-ray minimum, probably associated with the presence of dense clumps near the shock apex. During the recovery and after, the column density shows a smooth decline, which agrees with previous N H measurements made by Swift at the same orbital phase, indicating that the changes in the mass-loss rate are only a few percent over the two cycles. Finally, we use the variations in the X-ray flux of the outer ejecta seen by NICER to derive a kinetic X-ray luminosity of the ejecta of ∼1041 ergs s−1 near the time of the “Great Eruption.”

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207