Is the symbiotic recurrent nova T CrB late? Recent photometric evolution and comparison with past pre-outburst behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT T CrB is a symbiotic recurrent nova that last erupted in 1946. Given its recurrence time-scale of approximately 80 yr, the next outburst is eagerly anticipated by the astronomical community. In this work, we analyse the optical light curves of T CrB, comparing recent photometric evolution with historical data to evaluate potential predictive indicators of nova eruptions. Although the ‘superactive’ phases preceding both the 1946 and anticipated eruptions are strikingly similar, the subsequent photometric behaviour differs. We find that the decline in brightness observed in 2023, interpreted by some as a ‘pre-eruption dip’, deviates from the deep minimum recorded prior to the 1946 event and does not reliably predict the eruption timing. Recent photometric and spectroscopic observations indicate that the system is returning to a high-accretion state. Given this, an eruption may be imminent, even without distinct precursors. While the next eruption of T CrB will be a major scientific event, its expected peak brightness of $V \sim 2$ mag highlights the importance of setting realistic public expectations for what will be a visually modest, yet astrophysically very significant, celestial event.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".