The White Dwarf Initial–Final Mass Relation from Open Clusters in Gaia DR3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The initial–final mass relation (IFMR) links a star’s birth mass to the mass of its white dwarf (WD) remnant, providing key constraints on stellar evolution. Open clusters offer the most straightforward way to empirically determine the IFMR, as their well-defined ages allow for direct progenitor lifetime estimates. We construct the most comprehensive open cluster WD IFMR to date by combining new spectroscopy of 22 WDs with an extensive literature review of WDs with strong cluster associations. To minimize systematics, we restrict our analysis to spectroscopically confirmed hydrogen-atmosphere (DA) WDs consistent with single-stellar origins. We separately analyze a subset with reliable Gaia-based astrometric membership assessments, as well as a full sample that adds WDs with strong cluster associations whose membership cannot be reliably assessed with Gaia. The Gaia-based sample includes 69 spectroscopically confirmed DA WDs, more than doubling the sample size of previous Gaia-based open cluster IFMRs. The full sample, which includes 53 additional literature WDs, increases the total number of cluster WDs by over 50% relative to earlier works. We provide functional forms for both the Gaia-based and full-sample IFMRs. The Gaia-based result useful for M i ≥ 2.67 M ⊙ is M f = 0.179 − 0.100 H ( M i − 3.84 M ⊙ ) × ( M i − 3.84 M ⊙ ) + 0.628 M ⊙ , where H ( x ) is the Heaviside step function. Comparing our IFMR to recent literature, we identify significant deviations from best-fit IFMRs derived from both Gaia-based volume-limited samples of field WDs and double WD binaries, with the largest discrepancy occurring for initial masses of about 5 M ⊙ .
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".