MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408128331 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staf356

Study on the physical parameters of 18 contact binary stars

2025· article· en· W4408128331 on OpenAlexaff
Atila Poro, E. Jahangiri, Elham Sarvari, Razieh Aliakbari, Saeideh Ranjbaryan Iri Olya, R. Michel, Mehmet Tanrıver

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsBurnaby Hospital
FundersOhio State UniversityGordon and Betty Moore FoundationAlfred P. Sloan FoundationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsContact binaryStarsBinary numberAstrophysicsBinary starAstronomyTheoretical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present the photometric light curve solutions of 18 W Ursae Majoris-type contact binary stars with orbital periods shorter than 0.5 d. This investigation utilized photometric data from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite, Gaia, and the All Sky Automated Survey for SuperNovae. We analysed light curves using the PHysics Of Eclipsing BinariEs Python code. Eleven of the targeted systems required the inclusion of a starspot on one of the components during the analysis process. The absolute parameters of the systems were estimated using the Gaia Data Release 3 (DR3) parallax method. Based on each component’s effective temperature and mass, we identified seven systems as A-subtypes and eleven as W-subtypes. We compared the results of our photometric mass ratio with a new method that estimates it using the third derivative of the light curve. The semimajor axes that were derived from the estimation of absolute parameters using the Gaia DR3 parallax method were discussed. The positions of the systems are illustrated on the logarithmic scales’ mass–luminosity and mass–radius diagrams compared to the theoretical terminal-age main sequence and zero-age main sequence lines. We generated a bibliographic compilation of orbital and stellar parameters, which includes 818 contact binary systems. Then, we updated the 2D empirical parameter relationships for the primary stars, including period–temperature, period–mass, period–radius, and period–luminosity, along with diagrams illustrating the positions of the target systems. This sample is accessible as a machine-readable file for the subsequent studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicSpace Satellite Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207