MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387804075 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acffc4

An Extremely Massive White Dwarf Escaped from the Hyades Star Cluster

2023· article· en· W4387804075 on OpenAlexafffund
David R. Miller, Ilaria Caiazzo, Jeremy Heyl, Harvey B. Richer, Kareem El-Badry, Antonio C. Rodriguez, Zachary P. Vanderbosch, Jan van Roestel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWhite dwarfPhysicsOpen clusterAstrophysicsStar clusterSolar massPhotometry (optics)AstronomyStarsStellar evolutionCluster (spacecraft)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We searched the Gaia DR3 database for ultramassive white dwarfs with kinematics consistent with having escaped the nearby Hyades open cluster, identifying three such candidates. Two of these candidates have masses estimated from Gaia photometry of approximately 1.1 solar masses; their status as products of single-stellar evolution that have escaped the cluster was deemed too questionable for immediate follow-up analysis. The remaining candidate has an expected mass >1.3 solar masses, significantly reducing the probability of it being an interloper. Analysis of follow-up Gemini GMOS spectroscopy for this source reveals a nonmagnetized hydrogen atmosphere white dwarf with a mass and age consistent with having formed from a single star. Assuming a single-stellar-evolution formation channel, we estimate a 97.8% chance that the candidate is a true escapee from the Hyades. With a determined mass of 1.317 solar masses, this is potentially the most massive known single-evolution white dwarf and is by far the most massive with a strong association with an open cluster.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207