Companion mass limits for 17 binary systems obtained with binary differential imaging and MagAO/Clio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Improving direct detection capability close to the star through improved star subtraction and post-processing techniques is vital for discovering new low-mass companions and characterizing known ones at longer wavelengths. We present results of 17 binary star systems observed with the Magellan adaptive optics system (MagAO) and the Clio infrared camera on the Magellan Clay Telescope using binary differential imaging (BDI). BDI is an application of reference differential imaging (RDI) and angular differential imaging (ADI) applied to wide binary star systems (2 arcsec <Δρ < 10 arcsec) within the isoplanatic patch in the infrared. Each star serves as the point spread function (PSF) reference for the other, and we performed PSF estimation and subtraction using principal component analysis. We report contrast and mass limits for the 35 stars in our initial survey using BDI with MagAO/Clio in L′ and 3.95 µm bands. Our achieved contrasts varied between systems, and spanned a range of contrasts from 3.0 to 7.5 magnitudes and a range of separations from 0.2 to 2 arcsec. Stars in our survey span a range of masses, and our achieved contrasts correspond to late-type M-dwarf masses down to ∼10 MJup. We also report detection of a candidate companion signal at 0.2 arcsec (18 au) around HIP 67506 A (SpT G5V, mass ∼1.2 M⊙), which we estimate to be $\sim 60-90 \, \rm{M_{Jup}}$. We found that the effectiveness of BDI is highest for approximately equal brightness binaries in high-Strehl conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".