MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098612823

**FULL TITLE** ASP Conference Series, Vol. **VOLUME**, **YEAR OF PUBLICATION** **NAMES OF EDITORS** A Progress Report on the Empirical Determination of the ZZ Ceti Instability Strip

2006· article· en· W7098612823 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstability stripWhite dwarfStarsSkyInstabilityPhotometry (optics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Although the Sloan Digital Sky Survey has permitted the discovery of an increasing number of new ZZ Ceti stars, recent published analyses have shown that there are still many relatively bright (V < 17) ZZ Ceti stars waiting to be found. We will discuss the discovery of several such objects in addition to a number of DA stars in which we detected no photometric variations. These were uncovered as part of an ongoing spectroscopic survey of DA white dwarfs from the McCook & Sion Catalog. By determining the atmospheric parameters of a large sample of DA stars, we were able to identify objects placed within or near the empirical boundaries of the ZZ Ceti instability strip. By establishing the photometric status of these stars, we can use them in an effort to conclusively pin down the empirical boundaries of the ZZ Ceti instability strip. 1. Ongoing Survey of the McCook & Sion Catalog Since the early 1990s, our group in Montreal has been carrying out a systematic study aimed at defining the empirical boundaries of the ZZ Ceti instability strip. We use quantitative time-averaged optical spectroscopy to pin down the

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2190.179

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesFrench-language works237,207