Measurement of stellar and substellar winds using white dwarf hosts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT White dwarfs stars are known to be polluted by their active planetary systems, but little attention has been paid to the accretion of wind from low-mass companions. The capture of stellar or substellar wind by white dwarfs is one of few methods available to astronomers which can assess mass-loss rates from unevolved stars and brown dwarfs, and the only known method to extract their chemical compositions. In this work, four white dwarfs with closely orbiting, L-type brown dwarf companions are studied to place limits on the accretion of a substellar wind, with one case of a detection, and at an extremely non-solar abundance mNa/mCa > 900. The mass-loss rates and upper limits are tied to accretion in the white dwarfs, based on limiting cases for how the wind is captured, and compared with known cases of wind pollution from close M dwarf companions, which manifest in solar proportions between all elements detected. For wind captured in a Bondi–Hoyle flow, mass-loss limits $\dot{M}\lesssim 5\times 10^{-17}$ ${\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1}$ are established for three L dwarfs, while for M dwarfs polluting their hosts, winds in the range 10−13−10−16 ${\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1}$ are found. The latter compares well with the $\dot{M}\sim 10^{-13} {\!-\!} 10^{-15}$ ${\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1}$ estimates obtained for nearby, isolated M dwarfs using Ly$\alpha$ to probe their astropsheres. These results demonstrate that white dwarfs are highly sensitive stellar and substellar wind detectors, where further work on the actual captured wind flow is needed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".