Signs of binary evolution in seven magnetic DA white dwarfs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present our findings on the spectral analysis of seven magnetic white dwarfs that were presumed to be double degenerates. We obtained time-resolved spectroscopy at the Gemini Observatory to look for evidence of binarity or fast rotation. We find three of our targets have rotation periods of less than an hour based on the shifting positions of the Zeeman-split H α components: 13, 35, and 39 min, and we find one more target with a approximately an hour long period that is currently unconstrained. We use offset dipole models to determine the inclination, magnetic field strength, and dipole offset of each target. The average surface field strengths of our fast rotators vary by 1–2 MG between different spectra. In all cases, the observed absorption features are too shallow compared to our models. This could be due to extra flux from a companion for our three low-mass targets, but the majority of our sample likely requires an inhomogeneous surface composition. Including an additional magnetic white dwarf with similar properties presented in the literature, we find that five of the eight targets in this sample show field variations on minute/hour time-scales. A crystallization driven dynamo can potentially explain the magnetic fields in three of our targets with masses above 0.7 M⊙, but another mechanism is still needed to explain their rapid rotation. We suggest that rapid rotation or low-masses point to binary evolution as the likely source of magnetism in seven of these eight targets.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".