Perfecting Our Set of Spectrophotometric Standard DA White Dwarfs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We verified for photometric stability a set of DA white dwarfs with Hubble Space Telescope magnitudes from the near-ultraviolet to the near-infrared and ground-based spectroscopy by using time-spaced observations from the Las Cumbres Observatory network of telescopes. The initial list of 38 stars was whittled to 32 final ones, which comprise a high-quality set of spectrophotometric standards. These stars are homogeneously distributed around the sky and are all fainter than r ∼ 16.5 mag. Their distribution is such that at least two of them would be available to be observed from any observatory on the ground at any time at airmass less than 2. Light curves and different variability indices from the Las Cumbres Observatory data were used to determine the stability of the candidate standards. When available, Pan-STARRS1, Zwicky Transient Facility, and TESS data were also used to confirm the star classification. Our analysis showed that four DA white dwarfs may exhibit evidence of photometric variability, while a fifth is cooler than our established lower temperature limit, and a sixth star might be a binary. In some instances, due to the presence of faint nearby red sources, care should be used when observing a few of the spectrophotometric standards with ground-based telescopes. Light curves and finding charts for all the stars are provided.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".