Seven white dwarfs with circumstellar gas discs I: white dwarf parameters and accreted planetary abundances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Observations of planetary material polluting the atmospheres of white dwarfs are an important probe of the bulk composition of exoplanetary material. Medium- and high-resolution optical and ultraviolet spectroscopy of seven white dwarfs with known circumstellar dust and gas emission are presented. Detections or meaningful upper limits for photospheric absorption lines are measured for: C, O, Na, S, P, Mg, Al, Si, Ca, Ti, Cr, Fe, and Ni. For 16 white dwarfs with known observable gaseous emission discs (and measured photospheric abundances), there is no evidence that their accretion rates differ, on average, from those without detectable gaseous emission. This suggests that, typically, accretion is not enhanced by gas drag. At the effective temperature range of the white dwarfs in this sample (16 000–25 000 K) the abundance ratios of elements are more consistent than absolute abundances when comparing abundances derived from spectroscopic white dwarf parameters versus photometric white dwarf parameters. Crucially, this highlights that the uncertainties on white dwarf parameters do not prevent white dwarfs from being utilized to study planetary composition. The abundances of oxygen and silicon for the three hydrogen-dominated white dwarfs in the sample with both optical and ultraviolet spectra differ by 0.62 dex depending on if they are derived from the optical or ultraviolet spectra. This optical/ultraviolet discrepancy may be related to differences in the atmospheric depth of line formation; further investigations into the white dwarf atmospheric modelling are needed to understand this discrepancy.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".