MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380627117 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acbd44

New Chondritic Bodies Identified in Eight Oxygen-bearing White Dwarfs

2023· article· en· W4380627117 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra E. Doyle, B. Klein, P. Dufour, Carl Melis, B. Zuckerman, Siyi Xu, Alycia J. Weinberger, Nathaniel N. Monson, Michael Jura, Edward Young

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsWhite dwarfChondritePhysicsParent bodyMeteoriteAstrobiologySolar SystemAstrophysicsBlack dwarfOxygenAstronomyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present observations and analyses of eight white dwarf stars (WDs) that have accreted rocky material from their surrounding planetary systems. The spectra of these helium-atmosphere WDs contain detectable optical lines of all four major rock-forming elements (O, Mg, Si, and Fe). This work increases the sample of oxygen-bearing WDs with parent body composition analyses by roughly 33%. To first order, the parent bodies that have been accreted by the eight WDs are similar to those of chondritic meteorites in relative elemental abundances and oxidation states. Seventy-five percent of the WDs in this study have observed oxygen excesses implying volatiles in the parent bodies with abundances similar to those of chondritic meteorites. Three WDs have oxidation states that imply more reduced material than found in CI chondrites, indicating the possible detection of Mercury-like parent bodies, but are less constrained. These results contribute to the recurring conclusion that extrasolar rocky bodies closely resemble those in our solar system, and do not, as a whole, yield unusual or unique compositions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207