MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297370029 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac88d5

Double-mode Cepheids from the Zwicky Transient Facility Survey

2022· article· en· W4297370029 on OpenAlexaff
Vishwangi Shah, Xiaodian Chen, Richard de Grijs

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCepheid variableAstrophysicsPhysicsGravitational microlensingMilky WaySkyGravitational lensAstronomyGalaxyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multimode Cepheids pulsate simultaneously in more than one mode of oscillation. They provide an independent means to test stellar models and pulsation theories. They can also be used to derive metallicities. In recent years, the number of known multimode Cepheids has increased dramatically with the discovery of a large number of Galactic double-mode Cepheids. To date, 209 double-mode Cepheids have been detected in the Galactic bulge and disk, mostly based on the Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment’s (OGLE) catalog. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive search for double-mode Cepheids in the northern sky based on Zwicky Transient Facility Data Release 5. We found 72 such objects in the Milky Way. The periods of the 30 sample objects already included in the OGLE catalog show excellent agreement with the OGLE periods. The period ratios of our new Cepheids are consistent with those of known double-mode Cepheids, as evidenced by their loci in the so-called “Petersen diagram.” Compared with OGLE, the completeness of our double-mode Cepheid sample is around 71%. The much improved temporal sampling of the Zwicky Transient Facility offers significant scope to find more double-mode Cepheids, especially at the distribution’s short-period end.

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.246
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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