Using CHIRON spectroscopy to test the hypothesis of a precessing orbit for the WN4 star EZ CMa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The bright WN4 star EZ CMa exhibits a 3.77 d periodicity in photometry, spectroscopy, and polarimetry, but the variations in the measurements are not strictly phase-locked, exhibiting changes in reference times, amplitudes, and the shape of the variability happening over times as short as a few weeks. Recently, 137 d of contiguous, variable photometry from BRITE-constellation was interpreted as caused either by large-scale dense wind structures modulated by rotation, or by a fast-precessing binary having a slightly shorter 3.626 d orbital period and a fast apsidal motion rate of $1315^\circ \, \text{yr}^{-1}$. We aim at testing the latter hypothesis through analysis of spectroscopy and focus on the N v λ 4945 line. We derive an orbital solution for the system and reject the 3.626 d period to represent the variations in the radial velocities of EZ CMa. An orbital solution with an orbital period of 3.77 d was obtained but at the cost of an extremely high and thus improbable apsidal motion rate. Our best orbital solution yields a period of 3.751 ± 0.001 d with no apsidal motion. We place our results in the context of other variability studies and system properties. While we cannot fully reject the precessing binary model, we find that the corotating interaction region (CIR) hypothesis is better supported by these and other data through qualitative models of CIRs.
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 | 0.001 | 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".