WR 110: A Single Wolf-Rayet Star With Corotating Interaction Regions In Its Wind?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 30-day contiguous photometric run with the MOST satellite on the WN5-6b star WR 110 (HD 165688) reveals a fundamental periodicity of P = 4.08 +/- 0.55 days along with a number of harmonics at periods P/n, with n ~ 2,3,4,5 and 6, and a few other possible stray periodicities and/or stochastic variability on timescales longer than about a day. Spectroscopic RV studies fail to reveal any plausible companion with a period in this range. Therefore, we conjecture that the observed light-curve cusps of amplitude ~ 0.01 mag that recur at a 4.08 day timescale may arise in the inner parts, or at the base of, a corotating interaction region (CIR) seen in emission as it rotates around with the star at constant angular velocity. The hard X-ray component seen in WR 110 could then be a result of a high velocity component of the CIR shock interacting with the ambient wind at several stellar radii. Given that most hot, luminous stars showing CIRs have two CIR arms, it is possible that either the fundamental period is 8.2 days or, more likely in the case of WR 110, there is indeed a second weaker CIR arm for P = 4.08 days, that occurs ~ two thirds of a rotation period after the main CIR. If this interpretation is correct, WR 110 therefore joins the ranks with three other single WR stars, all WN, with confirmed CIR rotation periods (WR 1, WR 6, and WR 134), albeit with WR 110 having by far the lowest amplitude photometric modulation. This illustrates the power of being able to secure intense, continuous high-precision photometry from space-based platforms such as MOST. It also opens the door to revealing low-amplitude photometric variations in other WN stars, where previous attempts have failed. If all WN stars have CIRs at some level, this could be important for revealing sources of magnetism or pulsation in addition to rotation periods.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".