Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: extremely low mass ( elm ) wds , degenerate objects with @xmath5 ( cm s@xmath6 ) surface gravity or @xmath70.3 @xmath4  mass , are the product of common envelope binary evolution ( e.g. * ? ? ? elm wds are thus the signposts of the type of binaries that are strong gravitational wave sources and possible supernovae progenitors . the goal of the elm survey is to discover and characterize the population of elm wds in the milky way . previous elm survey papers have reported the discovery of 40 wds spanning 0.16 @xmath4  to 0.49 @xmath4  found in the hypervelocity star ( hvs ) survey , the sloan digital sky survey ( sdss ) , and in our own targeted survey @xcite . we refer to this full sample of wds as the elm survey sample , but reserve the term `` elm wd '' for those objects with @xmath5 . all of our wds are found in short - period , detached binaries , 60% of which have merger times @xmath210 gyr . three notable systems are detached binaries with @xmath240 min orbital periods @xcite . the eclipsing system j0651 + 2844 is the second - strongest gravitational wave source in the mhz range @xcite . we measured its period change in one year with optical eclipse timing @xcite . other results from the elm survey include the first tidally distorted wds @xcite and the first pulsating helium - core wds @xcite .    here we present the discovery of 17 new wd binaries identified from spectra previously obtained for the hvs survey of @xcite . @xcite analyzed the visually - identified wds in the original dataset and discovered one elm wd binary @xcite . this approach failed to identify the lowest surface gravity wds . we now fit stellar atmosphere models to the entire collection of spectra not previously identified as wds , and acquire follow - up spectroscopy of new elm wd candidates . the result of this effort is that we find low surface gravity objects that might not be considered wds if not for their observed orbital motion . we chose to call objects with @xmath8 `` elm wds '' because these objects occupy a unique region of surface gravity / effective temperature space that overlaps the terminal wd cooling branch for elm wds ( see figure [ fig : teff ] ) . this region is well separated from both hydrogen - burning main sequence tracks and helium - burning horizontal branch tracks . our objects are systematically @xmath910,000 k too cool , given their surface gravities , to be helium burning sdb stars . @xcite refer to a similar type of object as a `` proto - wd . '' the lowest gravity objects in our sample may indeed have hydrogen shell burning and thus are , properly speaking , proto - wds , but here we address our sample of low gravity objects as elm wds . a variety of observations demonstrate that degenerate helium - core wds exist at our observed temperatures and surface gravities . elm wd companions to milli - second pulsars are directly observed ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) at the temperatures and gravities targeted by the elm survey . the measured radius of the @xmath10 object in j0651 + 2844 , a @xmath11 @xmath12  star , demonstrates it is a degenerate wd @xcite . @xcite account for the unusually long pulsation periods of the elm wd pulsators with low mass wd models . hence , calling our low surface gravity objects elm wds is appropriate . interestingly , we find elm wds in binaries with @xmath130.9 @xmath4  companions and rapid merger times . when these detached binaries begin mass transfer , @xcite show that the extreme mass ratios will lead to stable mass transfer . for the case of massive wd accretors , theorists predict large helium flashes that may ignite thermonuclear transients dubbed `` .ia '' supernovae @xcite or may detonate the surface helium - layer and the massive wd @xcite and produce an underluminous supernova . however , the final outcome of such mergers is uncertain and they may not trigger supernovae explosions @xcite . if the companions are instead neutron stars , this would be the first time a milli - second pulsar is identified through its low - mass wd companion . such systems allow measurement of the binary mass ratio and the neutron star mass through a combination of the pulsar orbit obtained from radio timing and the wd orbit obtained from optical radial velocity observations . the importance of identifying the elm wds in the hvs survey is that the hvs survey is a well - defined and a nearly 100% complete spectroscopic survey . with a complete sample of elm wds we can measure the space density , period distribution , and merger rate of elm wds , and link elm wd merger products to populations of am cvn stars , r crb stars , and possibly underluminous supernovae . in a stellar evolution context , our elm wd survey complements studies of wd binaries with main sequence companions ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? * ) and with sdb star companions ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? sdb stars are @xmath14@xmath15 k helium - burning precursors to wds @xcite . our elm wds , on the other hand , have @xmath14@xmath16 k.    we organize this paper as follows . in section 2 we discuss our observations and data analysis . in section 3 we present the orbital solutions for 17 new elm wd binaries . in section 4 we discuss the properties of the elm wd sample . we conclude in section 5 . the hvs survey is a targeted spectroscopic survey of @xmath17 stars with the colors of @xmath183 @xmath4  main sequence stars , stars which should not exist at faint magnitudes in the halo unless they were ejected there . the target selection is detailed in @xcite and spans @xmath19 , @xmath20 . this color selection fortuitously targets wds in the approximate range @xmath21 @xmath14  @xmath16 k and @xmath22 . we separate elm wds from the other stars in the hvs survey using stellar atmosphere model fits to the single - epoch spectra . our initial set of fits uses an upgraded version of the ferre code described by @xcite and synthetic da wd pure hydrogen spectra kindly provided by d.  koester . the grid of wd model atmospheres covers effective temperatures from 6000 k to 30,000 k in steps of 500 k to 2000 k , and surface gravities from @xmath23=5.0 to 9.0 in steps of 0.25 dex . the model atmospheres are calculated assuming local thermodynamic equilibrium and include both convective and radiative transport @xcite . we fit 2,000 spectra , mostly from the original hvs survey @xcite but also some newly acquired data @xcite . these 2,000 spectra were not previously analyzed for the elm survey because the spectra were not previously identified as wds . we fit both flux - calibrated spectra ( for improved @xmath14  constraints ) as well as continuum - corrected balmer line profiles ( insensitive to reddening and flux calibration errors ) . for the continuum - corrected balmer line profiles , we normalize the spectra by fitting a low - order polynomial to the regions between the balmer lines . we adopt the parameters from the flux - calibrated spectra , except in cases where the spectra were obtained in non - photometric conditions . the uncertainties in our single - epoch measurements are typically @xmath24500 k in @xmath14  and @xmath25 dex in @xmath23 . from these fits we identify 57 low mass wd candidates . we obtain follow - up spectra for each of the candidate low mass wds to improve stellar atmosphere parameters and to search for velocity variability . observations were obtained over the course of seven observing runs at the 6.5 m mmt telescope between march 2011 and february 2013 . we used the blue channel spectrograph @xcite with the 832 line mm@xmath26 grating , which provides a wavelength coverage 3650   to 4500   and a spectral resolution of 1.0  . all observations were paired with a comparison lamp exposure , and were flux - calibrated using blue spectrophotometric standards @xcite . the extracted spectra typically have a signal - to - noise ( s / n ) of 7 per pixel in the continuum and a 14 km s@xmath26  radial velocity error . we obtained additional spectroscopy for @xmath27 mag elm wd candidates in queue scheduled time at the 1.5 m flwo telescope . we used the fast spectrograph @xcite with the 600 line mm@xmath26 grating and a 1.5  slit , providing wavelength coverage 3500   to 5500   and a spectral resolution of 1.7  . all observations were paired with a comparison lamp exposure , and were flux - calibrated using blue spectrophotometric standards . the extracted spectra typically have a s / n of 10 per pixel in the continuum and a 18 km s@xmath26  radial velocity error . our follow - up observations provide improved stellar atmosphere constraints , from which we determine that 24 ( 42% ) of the candidates are probable elm wds with @xmath8 ( see figure [ fig : teff ] ) . the remaining candidates have either @xmath28 and are normal da wds , or @xmath29 and are presumably halo blue horizontal branch or blue straggler stars . figure [ fig : teff ] plots the distribution of @xmath14  vs.  @xmath23  for all of the wds with @xmath30 . previously published elm survey stars are marked with red circles . the observed wds overlap tracks based on @xcite models for he - core wds with hydrogen shell burning ( ( green lines ) * ? ? ? * ) , but do not overlap main sequence nor horizontal branch evolutionary tracks . for reference , we also plot @xcite solar metallicity main sequence tracks for 2 , 3 , and 6 @xmath4  stars ( cyan lines ) . a helium - burning horizontal branch star can have a surface gravity similar to a degenerate he wd ( e.g. , * ? ? ? * ) , but only at a systematically higher effective temperature than that targeted by the elm survey . this is illustrated by @xcite [ fe / h]=-1.48 horizontal branch tracks for 0.488 , 0.495 , and 0.500 @xmath4  stars ( magenta lines ) , as well as the homogenous helium - burning main sequence from @xcite . the zero - age main sequence and helium - burning horizontal branch isochrones ( thick lines ) mark the limits . seventeen of the wds show significant velocity variability , including twelve of the newly identified elm wds . the other elm wds have insufficient coverage for detecting ( or ruling out ) velocity variability . we focus the remainder of this paper on the 17 well - constrained systems . our sample of 17 well - constrained systems contains four @xmath23  @xmath31 objects , objects at the edge of our stellar atmosphere grid that might not be considered degenerate wds if not for their observed orbital motion . we also fit these stars to grids of @xcite models spanning @xmath32 } \le 0.5 $ ] , @xmath33 ( see * ? ? ? * ) but found very poor solutions . this motivated us to perform a new set of stellar atmosphere fits using @xcite hydrogen model atmospheres . the gianninas models employ improved stark broadening profiles @xcite , and the ml2/@xmath34 = 0.8 prescription of the mixing - length theory for models where convective energy transport is important @xcite . we calculate atmosphere models for low surface gravities , and use a grid that covers @xmath14  from 4000 k to 30,000 k in steps ranging from 250 to 5000 k and @xmath23  from 5.0 to 8.0 in steps of 0.25 dex . ccccccccc j0056@xmath350611 & 0:56:48.232 & -6:11:41.62 & @xmath36 & @xmath37 & 0.17 & @xmath38 & 8.0 & 0.69 + j0751@xmath350141 & 7:51:41.179 & -1:41:20.90 & @xmath39 & @xmath40 & 0.17 & @xmath41 & 8.0 & 0.75 + j0755@xmath424800 & 7:55:19.483 & 48:00:34.07 & @xmath43 & @xmath44 & 0.42 & @xmath45 & 9.7 & 0.18 + j0802@xmath350955 & 8:02:50.134 & -9:55:49.84 & @xmath46 & @xmath47 & 0.20 & @xmath48 & 8.2 & 1.19 + j0811@xmath420225 & 8:11:33.560 & 2:25:56.76 & @xmath49 & @xmath50 & 0.17 & @xmath51 & 8.0 & 1.30 + j0815@xmath422309 & 8:15:44.242 & 23:09:04.92 & @xmath52 & @xmath53 & 0.17 & @xmath54 & 6.7 & 1.53 + j0840@xmath421527 & 8:40:37.574 & 15:27:04.53 & @xmath55 & @xmath56 & 0.17 & @xmath57 & 8.0 & 1.69 + j1046@xmath350153 & 10:46:07.875 & -1:53:58.48 & @xmath58 & @xmath59 & 0.37 & @xmath60 & 10.2 & 0.36 + j1104@xmath420918 & 11:04:36.739 & 9:18:22.74 & @xmath61 & @xmath62 & 0.46 & @xmath63 & 10.3 & 0.18 + j1141@xmath423850 & 11:41:55.560 & 38:50:03.02 & @xmath64 & @xmath65 & 0.17 & @xmath66 & 8.0 & 1.56 + j1151@xmath425858 & 11:51:38.381 & 58:58:53.22 & @xmath67 & @xmath68 & 0.17 & @xmath69 & 8.0 & 2.57 + j1157@xmath420546 & 11:57:34.455 & 5:46:45.58 & @xmath70 & @xmath71 & 0.17 & @xmath72 & 8.0 & 2.29 + j1238@xmath421946 & 12:38:00.096 & 19:46:31.45 & @xmath73 & @xmath74 & 0.17 & @xmath75 & 8.0 & 0.68 + j1538@xmath420252 & 15:38:44.220 & 2:52:09.49 & @xmath76 & @xmath77 & 0.17 & @xmath78 & 8.0 & 1.28 + j1557@xmath422823 & 15:57:08.483 & 28:23:36.02 & @xmath79 & @xmath80 & 0.49 & @xmath81 & 11.2 & 0.18 + j2132@xmath420754 & 21:32:28.360 & 7:54:28.24 & @xmath82 & @xmath83 & 0.17 & @xmath84 & 8.0 & 0.96 + j2338@xmath352052 & 23:38:21.505 & -20:52:22.76 & @xmath85 & @xmath86 & 0.27 & @xmath87 & 9.0 & 1.29 +    lccrrcccc j0056@xmath350611 & 33 & @xmath88 & @xmath89 & @xmath90 & @xmath91 & @xmath920.45 & @xmath930.374 & @xmath930.12 + j0751@xmath350141 & 31 & @xmath94 & @xmath95 & @xmath96 & @xmath97 & @xmath920.94 & @xmath930.182 & @xmath930.37 + j0755@xmath424800 & 26 & @xmath98 & @xmath99 & @xmath100 & @xmath101 & @xmath920.90 & @xmath930.468 & @xmath9328 + j0802@xmath350955 & 20 & @xmath102 & @xmath103 & @xmath104 & @xmath105 & @xmath920.57 & @xmath930.348 & @xmath9379 + j0811@xmath420225 & 24 & @xmath106 & @xmath107 & @xmath108 & @xmath109 & @xmath921.20 & @xmath930.142 & @xmath93160 + j0815@xmath422309 & 21 & @xmath110 & @xmath111 & @xmath112 & @xmath113 & @xmath920.47 & @xmath930.361 & @xmath93620 + j0840@xmath421527 & 19 & @xmath114 & @xmath115 & @xmath116 & @xmath117 & @xmath920.15 & @xmath930.879 & @xmath93230 + j1046@xmath350153 & 16 & @xmath118 & @xmath119 & @xmath120 & @xmath121 & @xmath920.19 & @xmath930.509 & @xmath9348 + j1104@xmath420918 & 25 & @xmath122 & @xmath123 & @xmath124 & @xmath125 & @xmath920.55 & @xmath930.831 & @xmath9339 + j1141@xmath423850 & 17 & @xmath126 & @xmath127 & @xmath128 & @xmath129 & @xmath920.76 & @xmath930.225 & @xmath9310 + j1151@xmath425858 & 17 & @xmath130 & @xmath131 & @xmath132 & @xmath133 & @xmath920.61 & @xmath930.277 & @xmath93150 + j1157@xmath420546 & 9 & @xmath134 & @xmath135 & @xmath136 & @xmath137 & @xmath920.44 & @xmath930.382 & @xmath93120 + j1238@xmath421946 & 21 & @xmath138 & @xmath139 & @xmath140 & @xmath141 & @xmath920.64 & @xmath930.266 & @xmath937.5 + j1538@xmath420252 & 16 & @xmath142 & @xmath143 & @xmath144 & @xmath145 & @xmath920.76 & @xmath930.222 & @xmath9335 + j1557@xmath422823 & 24 & @xmath146 & @xmath147 & @xmath148 & @xmath149 & @xmath920.43 & @xmath930.886 & @xmath9320 + j2132@xmath420754 & 35 & @xmath150 & @xmath151 & @xmath152 & @xmath153 & @xmath920.95 & @xmath930.179 & @xmath937.7 + j2338@xmath352052 & 25 & @xmath154 & @xmath155 & @xmath156 & @xmath157 & @xmath920.15 & @xmath930.554 & @xmath930.95 +    our stellar atmosphere fits use the so - called spectroscopic technique described in @xcite . one difference between our work and @xcite is that we fit higher - order balmer lines , up to and including h12 , observed in the low surface gravity elm wds . the higher - order balmer lines are sensitive to @xmath23  and improve our surface gravity measurement . for the handful of wds in our sample with @xmath28 , we only fit balmer lines up to and including h10 since the higher order balmer lines are not observed at higher surface gravity . the lowest gravity wds in our sample show ca and mg lines in their spectra . for reference , the diffusion timescale for ca in a @xmath158 10,000 k , 0.2 @xmath4  h - rich wd is @xmath9@xmath159 yr @xcite . extreme horizontal branch stars , which can have surface gravities comparable to the lowest gravity wds , have longer @xmath9@xmath160 yr diffusion timescales @xcite . these diffusion timescales are shorter than the wd evolutionary timescale , suggesting there may be on - going accretion in these ultra - compact binary systems . near- and mid - infrared observations are needed constrain the possibility of accretion . we defer a detailed analysis of the metal abundances in elm wds to a future paper . for our present analysis we exclude the wavelength ranges where the metal lines are present in our fits . our error estimates combine the internal error of the model fits , obtained from the covariance matrix of the fitting algorithm , and the external error , obtained from multiple observations of the same object . uncertainties are typically 1.2% in @xmath14  and 0.038 dex in @xmath23  ( see * ? ? ? * for details ) . a measure of the systematic uncertainty inherent in the stellar atmosphere models and fitting routines comes from @xcite , who find a systematic uncertainty of @xmath161 dex in @xmath23 . this is corroborated by the difference we observe between the different fitting methods discussed in section 2.1 and here : the mean difference and the dispersion in @xmath14is @xmath162 and in @xmath23is @xmath163 dex . figure [ fig : teff ] plots the properties of the 17 wds with their internal errorbars . we use @xcite evolutionary tracks to estimate wd mass and luminosity . for purpose of discussion , we assume @xmath164 wds have mass 0.17 @xmath4  and absolute magnitude @xmath165 ( see * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? we summarize the observed and derived stellar parameters of the 17 new binaries in table [ tab : param ] . position and de - reddened @xmath166-band magnitude come from sdss @xcite and @xmath167 is our heliocentric distance estimate . we calculate orbital elements and merger times in the same way as previous elm survey papers , and so we refer the reader to those papers for the details of our analysis . in brief , we measure absolute radial velocities using the cross - correlation package rvsao @xcite and a high - s / n template . we use the entire spectrum in the cross - correlation . we then use the summed spectra ( figure [ fig : spec ] ) as cross - correlation templates to maximize our velocity precision for each individual object . we calculate orbital elements by minimizing @xmath168 for a circular orbit using the code of @xcite . figure [ fig : pdm ] shows the periodograms for the 17 binaries , and figure [ fig : vel ] plots the radial velocities phased to the best - fit orbital periods . we use the binary mass function to estimate the unseen companion mass ; an edge - on orbit with inclination @xmath169 yields the minimum companion mass @xmath170 and the maximum gravitational wave merger time . table [ tab : orbit ] summarizes the binary orbital parameters . columns include orbital period ( @xmath171 ) , radial velocity semi - amplitude ( @xmath172 ) , systemic velocity ( @xmath173 ) , time of spectroscopic conjunction ( the time when the object is closest to us ) , minimum secondary mass ( @xmath170 ) assuming @xmath169 , the maximum mass ratio ( @xmath174 ) , and the maximum gravitational wave merger time @xmath175 . the systemic velocities in table [ tab : orbit ] are not corrected for the wds gravitational redshifts , which should be subtracted from the observed velocities to find the true systemic velocities . this correction is a few km s@xmath26 for a 0.17 @xmath4  helium wd , comparable to the systemic velocity uncertainty . the orbital solutions constrain the nature of the elm wd binaries . here we discuss the systems with short merger times , massive companions , or that may be underluminous supernovae progenitors . the elm wd j0056@xmath350611 has a well - constrained orbital period of @xmath176 hr and a semi - amplitude of @xmath177 km s@xmath26 . we can calculate its likely companion mass if we assume a distribution for the unknown orbital inclination . although radial velocity detections are biased towards edge - on systems ( see section 4 ) , we will assume that we are observing a random inclination for purpose of discussion . the mean inclination angle for a random sample , @xmath178 , is then an estimate of the most likely companion mass . for j0056@xmath350611 , the most likely companion is a 0.61 @xmath4  wd at an orbital separation of 0.5 @xmath12 . this orbital separation rules out the possibility of a main sequence companion . there is no evidence for a 0.61 @xmath4  wd in the spectrum of j0056@xmath350611 , but we would not expect there to be . if the two wds in this binary formed at the same time , we would expect the 0.61 @xmath4  wd to be 15 - 100 times less luminous than the 0.17 @xmath4  wd for cooling ages of 100 myr - 1 gyr @xcite . a more plausible evolutionary scenario for an elm wd binary like j0056@xmath350611 is two consecutive phases of common - envelope evolution in which the elm wd is created last , giving the more massive wd a longer time to cool and fade ( e.g. * ? * ) .    for the most probable companion mass of 0.61 @xmath4 , j0056@xmath350611 will begin mass transfer in 100 myr . @xcite discuss the many possible stellar evolution paths for such a system . this system s mass ratio @xmath1790.37 suggests that mass transfer will likely be stable @xcite and that j0056@xmath350611 will evolve into an am cvn system . the elm wd j0751@xmath350141 has a @xmath180 hr orbital period with aliases ranging between 1.85 and 2.05 hr ( see figure [ fig : pdm ] ) . the large @xmath181 km s@xmath26  semi - amplitude indicates that the companion is massive , regardless of the exact period . the minimum companion mass is 0.94 @xmath4 . assuming a random inclination distribution , there is a 47% probability that the companion is @xmath131.4 @xmath4 .    given that the elm wd went through a common envelope phase of evolution with its companion , j0751@xmath350141 possibly contains a milli - second pulsar binary companion . helium - core wds are the most common type of companion in known milli - second pulsar binaries @xcite . we have been allocated cycle 14 _ chandra x - ray observatory _ time to search for x - ray emission from a possible neutron star .    for @xmath178 , the companion is a 1.32 @xmath4  wd , and the system will begin mass transfer in 290 myr . the extreme mass ratio @xmath1790.18 means that this system will undergo stable mass transfer and evolve into an am cvn system . as the binary orbit widens in the am cvn phase , the mass accretion rate will drop and the mass required for the unstable burning of the accreted he - layer increases up to several percent of a solar mass . the final flash should ignite a thermonuclear transient visible as an underluminous supernova @xcite . it is also possible that the helium flash will detonate the massive wd in a double - detonation scenario ( * ? ? ? * though see dan et al . if j0751@xmath350141 has a massive wd companion , it is a probable supernova progenitor . the elm wd j0811 + 0225 has an orbital period of @xmath182 hr and a semi - amplitude of 221 km s@xmath26 . these orbital parameters yield a minimum companion mass of 1.20 @xmath4 . that means the companion probably exceeds a chandrasekhar mass . for @xmath178 , the most likely companion is a 1.70 @xmath4  neutron star at an orbital separation of 4.6 @xmath12 . there is no fermi gamma - ray detection at this location , but additional observations are needed to determine the nature of this system . the elm wd j0840 + 1527 has a best - fit @xmath23@xmath183 near the limit of our model grid . its best - fit orbital period is @xmath184 hr with a significant alias at 8.3 hr . assuming this object is 0.17 @xmath4 , its most likely companion is a wd with a comparable mass , 0.19 @xmath4 , at an orbital separation of 1.9 @xmath12 . if , on the other hand , j0840 + 1527 were a 3 @xmath4  main sequence star , its companion would have an orbital separation of 4.3 @xmath12   a separation comparable to the radius of a 3 @xmath4  star , and thus physically implausible . there is no evidence for mass transfer in this system . we conclude that j0840 + 1527 is a pair of elm wds . j1141 + 3850 , j1157 + 0546 , and j1238 + 1946 are the other systems containing wds near the low - gravity limit of our stellar atmosphere model grid , but their @xmath185 - 266 km s@xmath26  semi - amplitudes are significantly larger than that of j0840 + 1527 . if we assume that the objects are 0.17 @xmath4  elm wds , then the binary companions have minimum masses of 0.45 - 0.75 @xmath4 . if we instead assume that the objects are main sequence stars , then the required orbital separations are comparable to the radius of the main sequence star and physically impossible . there is no evidence for mass transfer in these systems . we conclude that j1141 + 3850 , j1157 + 0546 , and j1238 + 1946 are elm wds with likely wd companions . for j1141 + 3850 , there is a 36% probability that the companion is @xmath131.4 @xmath4 , possibly a milli - second pulsar . for j1141 + 3850 and j1238 + 1946 , mass transfer will begin in 7 - 10 gyr , making them am cvn progenitors and possible underluminous supernovae progenitors . the elm wd j2132 + 0754 has a well - constrained orbital period of @xmath186 hr and semi - amplitude of @xmath187 km s@xmath26 . the minimum companion mass is 0.95 @xmath4 , and there is a 48% probability that the companion is @xmath131.4 @xmath4 , possibly a milli - second pulsar . for @xmath178 , the most likely companion is a 1.33 @xmath4  wd that will begin mass transfer in 6 gyr . that makes j2132 + 0754 a likely am cvn progenitor and another possible underluminous supernovae progenitor . the elm wd j2338@xmath352052 has an orbital period of @xmath188 hr and a semi - amplitude of @xmath189 km s@xmath26 . in this case the companion is another elm wd ; for @xmath178 , the most likely companion is a 0.17 @xmath4  wd at an orbital separation of 0.56 @xmath12 . given the unity mass ratio , this system will undergo unstable mass transfer and will merge to form a single @xmath90.4 @xmath4  wd . this system will merge in less than 1 gyr . with these 17 new discoveries , plus the pulsating elm wd discovery published by @xcite , the elm survey has found 54 detached , double degenerate binaries ; 31 of the binaries will merge within a hubble time . table [ tab : summary ] summarizes the properties of the systems . eighty percent of the elm survey binaries are formally elm wd systems . we find low mass wds in compact binaries , binaries that must have gone through common envelope evolution . this makes sense because extremely low mass wds require significant mass loss to form ; the universe is not old enough to produce an extremely low mass wd through single star evolution . yet four objects published in the elm survey have no significant velocity variability , two of which are elm wds ( see table [ tab : summary ] ) . to understand whether or not these stars are single requires that we understand the significance of our binary detections . each elm survey binary is typically constrained by 10 - 30 irregularly spaced velocities with modest errors . given that we determine orbital parameters by minimizing @xmath168 , the @xmath190-test is a natural choice . we use the @xmath190-test to check whether the variance of the data around the orbital fit is consistent with the variance of the data around a constant velocity ( we use the weighted mean of the observations ) . @xmath190-test probabilities for the published elm survey binaries are @xmath191 . in other words , our binaries have significant velocity variability at the @xmath192% confidence level .    in the null cases we need to calculate the likelihood of not detecting a binary . this is a trickier problem , and one that we approach with a monte carlo calculation . we start by selecting a set of observations ( times , velocity errors ) and an orbital period and semi - amplitude . we convert observation times to orbital phases using a randomly drawn zero time , and calculate velocities at those phases summed with a randomly drawn velocity error . we perform the @xmath190-test , using 0.01 as a detection threshold . we repeat this calculation 10,000 times for a given orbital period and semi - amplitude , and then select a new orbital period and semi - amplitude to iterate on . this analysis is done for each object . we find that the datasets for our 17 new binaries have a median 99.9% likelihood of detecting @xmath193 km s@xmath26  binaries , a 97% likelihood of detecting @xmath194 km s@xmath26  binaries , and a 44% likelihood of detecting @xmath195 km s@xmath26  binaries . it is no surprise that we are less likely to detect a low semi - amplitude binary , but this analysis suggests that we can be quite confident of detecting @xmath196 km s@xmath26systems . we find very similar likelihoods for detecting binaries containing elm wds in the full elm survey sample . the datasets for the null cases typically contain fewer observations and so are not as well - constrained . for j0900 + 0234 , a 0.16 @xmath4  elm wd with no observed velocity variation @xcite , the likelihoods of detecting a @xmath193 , 100 , and 50 km s@xmath26  binary are 87% , 57% , and 10% , respectively . additional observations are required to claim this elm wd as non - variable . there is , of course , an orbital period dependence to the detections , and periods near 24 hr are the most problematic . taken together , our datasets have a median 39% likelihood of detecting a @xmath194 km s@xmath26  binary at @xmath197 hr . yet we remain sensitive to longer periods : our datasets have median 99% and 98% likelihoods of detecting a @xmath194 km s@xmath26  binary at @xmath198 hr and @xmath199 hr , respectively . figure [ fig : kp ] plots the observed distribution of @xmath171 and @xmath172 for the elm survey binaries . the dashed lines indicate the approximate companion mass assuming @xmath200 is 0.2 @xmath4  and @xmath201 is 60@xmath202 . at @xmath194 km s@xmath26 , we can detect companion masses down to 0.1 @xmath4  at 2 hr orbital periods and 0.55 @xmath4companions at 2 day orbital periods . systems with @xmath203 km s@xmath26  are the realm of @xmath70.2 @xmath4  companions , and we observe a half - dozen systems with these parameters . our incompleteness at @xmath203 km s@xmath26  implies there are quite likely more elm wds with @xmath180.2 @xmath4  companions ; the remaining elm wd candidates that do not show obvious velocity change in a couple observations are possible examples of such low amplitude systems . finally , orbital inclination acts to increase the difficulty of identifying lone elm wds . consider the set of 46 elm wds in table [ tab : summary ] with @xmath5 , two of which are non - variable . their median @xmath172 is 240 km s@xmath26 , a semi - amplitude that would appear @xmath204 km s@xmath26  at @xmath205 . if the 46 objects have randomly distributed orbital inclinations , one object should have @xmath205 and a second @xmath206 . we conclude there is no good evidence for a lone elm wd in our present sample . this is in stark contrast to the population of 0.4 @xmath4 wds in the solar neighborhood , of which 20%-30% are single @xcite . one of the most exciting aspects of our elm wd binaries is that many have gravitational wave merger times less than a hubble time , and in one case as short as 1 myr @xcite . a natural question , then , is what will happen when the wds merge . notably , 5 of our 17 new binaries have probable system masses ( for @xmath178 ) in excess of a chandrasekhar mass .    figure [ fig : merge ] plots the distribution of merger time and system mass for the elm survey binaries assuming @xmath178 , except when inclination is known . the majority of our binaries have probable masses below the chandrasekhar mass and are not potential supernova type ia progenitors , but six systems appear to have either neutron star or massive wd companions . the evolution of these six systems depends on the stability of mass transfer during the roche lobe overflow phase , and thus on the mass ratio of the binary . figure [ fig : tau ] plots the distribution of merger time and mass ratio @xmath174 for the elm survey binaries , again assuming @xmath178 except when inclination is known . the chandrasekhar mass systems generally have extreme @xmath207 and so will evolve into stable mass transfer am cvn systems . if the accretors are massive wds , these systems should experience a large helium flash that may appear as an underluminous .ia supernova ( e.g. * ? ? ? * ; * ? ? ? it is also possible that the helium flash will detonate the massive wd in a double - detonation scenario @xcite . the chandrasekhar mass systems are thus potential supernovae progenitors . however , the outcome of a merger of an elm wd with a massive wd is uncertain ( see * ? ? ? systems with @xmath208 , such as j2338@xmath352052 , will experience unstable mass transfer . these systems may merge @xcite to form a single low - mass wd , r crb star , or helium - burning sdb star . systems with intermediate @xmath209 , such as j0651 + 2844 , will experience either stable or unstable mass transfer depending on their spin - orbit coupling . after we constrain the remaining elm wd candidates plotted in fig.[fig : teff ] we look forward to calculating their space density and merger rate . elm wds binaries are clearly an important channel for am cvn star formation , and thus an important source of strong gravitational waves in the mhz regime . we perform stellar atmosphere fits to the entire collection of single - epoch spectra in the hvs survey and identify 57 new low mass wd candidates . follow - up spectroscopy reveals 17 wds with significant velocity variability , 12 of which are elm wds . presently , the elm survey sample is consistent with all of the elm wds being part of close binaries . elm wds are thus signposts for binaries that are strong gravitational wave sources and possible supernovae progenitors . four binaries in our sample contain @xmath1 objects , objects that might not be considered wds or proto - wds if not for their observed orbital motion . the existence of @xmath1 wds motivates us to develop a new set of stellar atmosphere models following @xcite . interestingly , all of the lowest surface gravity ( @xmath164 ) wds in our sample have metal lines in their spectra . this issue will be studied in detail in a future paper ; infrared observations are needed to constrain the possibility of debris disks as the source of ca and mg accretion in these compact binary systems . recent discoveries of pulsations in several of our elm wd targets @xcite enable us to probe the interiors of low - mass , presumably he - core wds using the tools of asteroseismology . due to the hvs color selection , all of the newly identified systems are hotter than 10,000 k and therefore too hot to show the g - mode pulsations detected in cooler elm wds @xcite . four binaries in our sample have massive @xmath30.9 @xmath4  companions and @xmath210 gyr merger times . if the unseen companions are massive wds , these extreme mass ratio binaries will undergo stable mass transfer and will evolve into am cvn systems and potentially future .ia or underluminous supernovae . thus the systems j0751@xmath350141 , j1141 + 3850 , j1238 + 1946 , and j2132 + 0754 are possible supernova progenitors . the other possibility is that the massive companions in these four binaries are neutron stars . given their past common envelope evolution , the systems quite possibly contain milli - second pulsars . a fifth system , j0811 + 0225 , appears to have a minimum companion mass close to a chandrasekhar mass . we are conducting follow - up optical , radio , and x - ray observations to establish the nature of these extreme mass ratio elm wd binaries . optically visible wd companions of neutron stars are useful for constraining the binary mass ratio and also to calibrate the spin - down ages of milli - second pulsars .    given our present observations , we expect that the elm survey will grow to 100 binaries in a few years . a large sample is important for finding more systems like j0651 + 2844 , a 12.75 min period system that provides us with a laboratory for measuring the spin - orbit coupling and tidal heating of a rapidly merging pair of wds . we expect that photometric observations will discover more pulsating elm wds . finally , a larger sample of elm wds will be an important source of gravitational wave verification sources for @xmath210 and other future gravitational wave detection experiments . we thank m.  alegria , p.  canton , s.  gotilla , j.  mcafee , e.  martin , a.milone , and r.  ortiz for their assistance with observations obtained at the mmt observatory , and p.  berlind and m.  calkins for their assistance with observations obtained at the fred lawrence whipple observatory . we also thank p.  bergeron and d.  koester for their invaluable assistance in the computation of our stellar atmosphere model grids . this research makes use of the sao / nasa astrophysics data system bibliographic service . this project makes use of data products from the sloan digital sky survey , which has been funded by the alfred p.  sloan foundation , the participating institutions , the national science foundation , and the u.s.department of energy office of science . this work was supported in part by the smithsonian institution . _ facilities : _ crcccccccc j0022@xmath351014 & 18980 & 7.15 & 0.07989 & 145.6 & 0.33 & @xmath211 & 0.23 & @xmath212 & 6 + j0056@xmath350611 & 12210 & 6.17 & 0.04338 & 376.9 & 0.17 & @xmath213 & 0.61 & @xmath214 & + j0106@xmath351000 & 16490 & 6.01 & 0.02715 & 395.2 & 0.17 & 0.43 & & 0.037 & 7 + j0112 + 1835 & 9690 & 5.63 & 0.14698 & 295.3 & 0.16 & @xmath215 & 0.85 & @xmath216 & 1 + j0651 + 2844 & 16530 & 6.76 & 0.00886 & 616.9 & 0.26 & 0.50 & & 0.0011 & 3,15 + j0751@xmath350141 & 15660 & 5.43 & 0.08001 & 432.6 & 0.17 & @xmath217 & 1.32 & @xmath218 & + j0755 + 4906 & 13160 & 5.84 & 0.06302 & 438.0 & 0.17 & @xmath219 & 1.12 & @xmath220 & 2 + j0818 + 3536 & 10620 & 5.69 & 0.18315 & 170.0 & 0.17 & @xmath221 & 0.33 & @xmath222 & 2 + j0822 + 2753 & 8880 & 6.44 & 0.24400 & 271.1 & 0.17 & @xmath223 & 1.05 & @xmath224 & 4 + j0825 + 1152 & 24830 & 6.61 & 0.05819 & 319.4 & 0.26 & @xmath225 & 0.61 & @xmath226 & 0 + j0849 + 0445 & 10290 & 6.23 & 0.07870 & 366.9 & 0.17 & @xmath227 & 0.88 & @xmath228 & 4 + j0923 + 3028 & 18350 & 6.63 & 0.04495 & 296.0 & 0.23 & @xmath229 & 0.44 & @xmath230 & 2 + j1005 + 0542 & 15740 & 7.25 & 0.30560 & 208.9 & 0.34 & @xmath231 & 0.86 & @xmath232 & 0 + j1005 + 3550 & 10010 & 5.82 & 0.17652 & 143.0 & 0.17 & @xmath211 & 0.24 & @xmath233 & 0 + j1053 + 5200 & 15180 & 6.55 & 0.04256 & 264.0 & 0.20 & @xmath221 & 0.33 & @xmath234 & 4,9 + j1056 + 6536 & 20470 & 7.13 & 0.04351 & 267.5 & 0.34 & @xmath229 & 0.43 & @xmath235 & 0 + j1112 + 1117 & 9590 & 6.36 & 0.17248 & 116.2 & 0.17 & @xmath236 & 0.17 & @xmath237 & 16 + j1141@xmath423850 & 11620 & 5.31 & 0.25958 & 265.8 & 0.17 & @xmath223 & 1.05 & @xmath238 & + j1233 + 1602 & 10920 & 5.12 & 0.15090 & 336.0 & 0.17 & @xmath239 & 1.20 & @xmath240 & 2 + j1234@xmath350228 & 18000 & 6.64 & 0.09143 & 94.0 & 0.23 & @xmath241 & 0.11 & @xmath216 & 6 + j1238@xmath421946 & 16170 & 5.28 & 0.22275 & 258.6 & 0.17 & @xmath227 & 0.88 & @xmath242 & + j1436 + 5010 & 16550 & 6.69 & 0.04580 & 347.4 & 0.24 & @xmath213 & 0.60 & @xmath243 & 4,9 + j1443 + 1509 & 8810 & 6.32 & 0.19053 & 306.7 & 0.17 & @xmath244 & 1.15 & @xmath245 & 1 + j1630 + 4233 & 14670 & 7.05 & 0.02766 & 295.9 & 0.30 & @xmath246 & 0.37 & @xmath247 & 8 + j1741 + 6526 & 9790 & 5.19 & 0.06111 & 508.0 & 0.16 & @xmath248 & 1.55 & @xmath249 & 1 + j1840 + 6423 & 9140 & 6.16 & 0.19130 & 272.0 & 0.17 & @xmath227 & 0.88 & @xmath250 & 1 + j2103@xmath350027 & 10000 & 5.49 & 0.20308 & 281.0 & 0.17 & @xmath251 & 0.99 & @xmath252 & 0 + j2119@xmath350018 & 10360 & 5.36 & 0.08677 & 383.0 & 0.17 & @xmath253 & 1.04 & @xmath254 & 2 + j2132@xmath420754 & 13700 & 6.00 & 0.25056 & 297.3 & 0.17 & @xmath255 & 1.33 & @xmath256 & + j2338@xmath352052 & 16630 & 6.87 & 0.07644 & 133.4 & 0.27 & @xmath257 & 0.18 & @xmath258 & + nltt11748 & 8690 & 6.54 & 0.23503 & 273.4 & 0.18 & 0.76 & & 7.2 & 5,10,11 + j0022 + 0031 & 17890 & 7.38 & 0.49135 & 80.8 & 0.38 & @xmath259 & 0.26 & & 6 + j0152 + 0749 & 10840 & 5.80 & 0.32288 & 217.0 & 0.17 & @xmath260 & 0.78 & & 1 + j0730 + 1703 & 11080 & 6.36 & 0.69770 & 122.8 & 0.17 & @xmath261 & 0.41 & & 0 + j0755@xmath424800 & 19890 & 7.46 & 0.54627 & 194.5 & 0.42 & @xmath262 & 1.18 & & + j0802@xmath350955 & 16910 & 6.42 & 0.54687 & 176.5 & 0.20 & @xmath260 & 0.76 & & + j0811@xmath420225 & 13990 & 5.79 & 0.82194 & 220.7 & 0.17 & @xmath263 & 1.71 & & + j0815@xmath422309 & 21470 & 5.78 & 1.07357 & 131.7 & 0.17 & @xmath225 & 0.63 & & + j0840@xmath421527 & 13810 & 5.04 & 0.52155 & 84.8 & 0.17 & @xmath257 & 0.19 & & + j0845 + 1624 & 17750 & 7.42 & 0.75599 & 62.2 & 0.40 & @xmath211 & 0.22 & & 0 + j0900 + 0234 & 8220 & 5.78 & & @xmath264 & 0.16 & & & & 1 + j0917 + 4638 & 11850 & 5.55 & 0.31642 & 148.8 & 0.17 & @xmath265 & 0.36 & & 12 + j1046@xmath350153 & 14880 & 7.37 & 0.39539 & 80.8 & 0.37 & @xmath211 & 0.23 & & + j1104@xmath420918 & 16710 & 7.61 & 0.55319 & 142.1 & 0.46 & @xmath266 & 0.70 & & + j1151@xmath425858 & 15400 & 6.09 & 0.66902 & 175.7 & 0.17 & @xmath267 & 0.84 & & + j1157@xmath420546 & 12100 & 5.05 & 0.56500 & 158.3 & 0.17 & @xmath268 & 0.59 & & + j1422 + 4352 & 12690 & 5.91 & 0.37930 & 176.0 & 0.17 & @xmath269 & 0.55 & & 2 + j1439 + 1002 & 14340 & 6.20 & 0.43741 & 174.0 & 0.18 & @xmath213 & 0.62 & & 2 + j1448 + 1342 & 12580 & 6.91 & & @xmath270 & 0.25 & & & & 2 + j1512 + 2615 & 12130 & 6.62 & 0.59999 & 115.0 & 0.20 & @xmath265 & 0.36 & & 2 + j1518 + 0658 & 9810 & 6.66 & 0.60935 & 172.0 & 0.20 & @xmath271 & 0.78 & & 1 + j1538@xmath420252 & 11560 & 5.97 & 0.41915 & 227.6 & 0.17 & @xmath272 & 1.06 & & + j1557@xmath422823 & 12550 & 7.76 & 0.40741 & 131.2 & 0.49 & @xmath273 & 0.54 & & + j1625 + 3632 & 23570 & 6.12 & 0.23238 & 58.4 & 0.20 & @xmath274 & 0.08 & & 6 + j1630 + 2712 & 11200 & 5.95 & 0.27646 & 218.0 & 0.17 & @xmath275 & 0.70 & & 2 + j2252@xmath350056 & 19450 & 7.00 & & @xmath276 & 0.31 & & & & 2 + j2345@xmath350102 & 33130 & 7.20 & & @xmath277 & 0.42 & & & & 2 + lp400@xmath3522 & 11170 & 6.35 & 1.01016 & 119.9 & 0.19 & @xmath269 & 0.52 & & 13,14    73 natexlab#1#1    , h. , allende prieto , c. , an , d. , et  al . 2011 , , 193 , 29    , c. , beers , t.  c. , wilhelm , r. , et  al . 2006 , , 636 , 804    , c. , sivarani , t. , beers , t.  c. , et  al . 2008 , , 136 , 2070    , c.  g. , van kerkwijk , m.  h. , koester , d. , & verbunt , f. 2006 , , 456 , 295    , p. , wesemael , f. , & beauchamp , a. 1995 , , 107 , 1047    , l. , shen , k.  j. , weinberg , n.  n. , & nelemans , g. 2007 , , 662 , l95    , j.  m. , kilic , m. , brown , w.  r. , & kenyon , s.  j. 2011 , , 729 , 2    , w.  r. , geller , m.  j. , & kenyon , s.  j. 2009 , , 690 , 1639    . 2012 , , 751 , 55    , w.  r. , geller , m.  j. , kenyon , s.  j. , & kurtz , m.  j. 2005 , , 622 , l33    . 2006 , , 640 , l35    . 2006 , , 647 , 303    , w.  r. , geller , m.  j. , kenyon , s.  j. , kurtz , m.  j. , & bromley , b.  c. 2007 , , 660 , 311    . 2007 , , 671 , 1708    , w.  r. , kilic , m. , allende prieto , c. , & kenyon , s.  j. 2010 , , 723 , 1072    . 2011 , , 411 , l31    . 2012 , , 744 , 142    , w.  r. , kilic , m. , hermes , j.  j. , et  al . 2011 , , 737 , l23    , g. , ferraro , f.  r. , possenti , a. , & damico , n. 2006 , , 641 , l129    , a.  h. , romero , a.  d. , althaus , l.  g. , & hermes , j.  j. 2012 , , 547 , a96    , m. , rosswog , s. , guillochon , j. , & ramirez - ruiz , e. 2011 , , 737 , 89    . 2012 , , 422 , 2417    , b. , rood , r.  t. , & oconnell , r.  w. 1993 , , 419 , 596    , d. , cheimets , p. , caldwell , n. , & geary , j. 1998 , , 110 , 79    , s. , schaffenroth , v. , hirsch , h. , et  al . 2012 , in asp conf . ser , , vol . 452 , fifth meeting on hot subdwarf stars and related objects , ed . d.  kilkenny , c.  s. jeffery , & c.  koen , 129    , a. , bergeron , p. , & ruiz , m.  t. 2011 , , 743 , 138    , l. , bertelli , g. , bressan , a. , et  al . 2002 , , 391 , 195    , l. , grebel , e.  k. , odenkirchen , m. , & chiosi , c. 2004 , , 422 , 205    , u. 2009 , , 47 , 211    , u. , edelmann , h. , lisker , t. , & napiwotzki , r. 2003 , , 411 , l477    , j.  j. , kilic , m. , brown , w.  r. , montgomery , m.  h. , & winget , d.  e. 2012 , , 749 , 42    , j.  j. , kilic , m. , brown , w.  r. , et  al . 2012 , , 757 , l21    , j.  j. , montgomery , m.  h. , winget , d.  e. , brown , w.  r. , kilic , m. , & kenyon , s.  j. 2012 , , 750 , l28    , j.  j. , montgomery , m.  h. , winget , d.  e. , et  al . 2013 , , accepted    , d.  l. , bhalerao , v.  b. , van kerkwijk , m.  h. , et  al . 2013 , , accepted    , a. , vennes , s. , & vaccaro , t.  r. 2010 , , 516 , l7    , s.  j. & garcia , m.  r. 1986 , , 91 , 125    , m. , allende prieto , c. , brown , w.  r. , & koester , d. 2007 , , 660 , 1451    , m. , allende prieto , c. , brown , w.  r. , et  al . 2010 , , 721 , l158    , m. , brown , w.  r. , allende prieto , c. , kenyon , s.  j. , & panei , j.  a. 2010 , , 716 , 122    , m. , brown , w.  r. , allende prieto , c. , pinsonneault , m. , & kenyon , s. 2007 , , 664 , 1088    , m. , brown , w.  r. , allende prieto , c. , swift , b. , kenyon , s.  j. , liebert , j. , & ageros , m.  a. 2009 , , 695 , l92    , m. , brown , w.  r. , allende prieto , c. , et  al . 2011 , , 727 , 3    . 2012 , , 751 , 141    , m. , brown , w.  r. , hermes , j.  j. , et  al . 2011 , , 418 , l157    , m. , brown , w.  r. , kenyon , s.  j. , et  al . 2011 , , 413 , l101    , d. 2008 , arxiv:0812.0482    , m.  j. & mink , d.  j. 1998 , , 110 , 934    , r.  l. 1993 , synthe spectrum synthesis programs and line data ( kurucz cd - rom ; cambridge , ma : smithsonian astrophysical observatory )    , j. , bergeron , p. , & holberg , j.  b. 2005 , , 156 , 47    , t.  r. , dhillon , v.  s. , & duck , s.  r. 1995 , , 275 , 828    , t.  r. , nelemans , g. , & steeghs , d. 2004 , , 350 , 113    , p. , strobel , k. , barnes , j.  v. , & anderson , e. 1988 , , 328 , 315    , g. , richer , j. , & richard , o. 2008 , , 675 , 1223    , f. , badenes , c. , thompson , s.  e. , & lupton , r. 2009 , , 707 , l51    , k. 1982 , , 253 , 798    , b. 1971 , acta astron . , 21 , 1    , j.  a. , althaus , l.  g. , chen , x. , & han , z. 2007 , , 382 , 779    , c. , pelletier , c. , fontaine , g. , & michaud , g. 1986 , , 61 , 197    , s. , gnsicke , b.  t. , brady , s. , et  al . 2012 , , 419 , 817    , a. , nebot gmez - morn , a. , schreiber , m.  r. , et  al . 2012 , , 419 , 806    , g.  d. , weymann , r.  j. , & foltz , c.  b. 1989 , , 101 , 713    , k.  j. & bildsten , l. 2009 , , 699 , 1365    , r. , stensen , r.  h. , bloemen , s. , et  al . 2012 , , 424 , 1752    , s.  a. , fink , m. , kromer , m. , et  al . 2012 , , 420 , 3003    , j.  d.  r. , kaplan , d.  l. , shporer , a. , bildsten , l. , & howell , s.  b. 2010 , , 716 , l146    , t.  m. , langer , n. , & kramer , m. 2012 , , 425 , 1601    , p .- e . & bergeron , p. 2009 , , 696 , 1755    , p .- e . , bergeron , p. , kalirai , j.  s. , & gianninas , a. 2010 , , 712 , 1345    , v. , fontaine , g. , brassard , p. , & dupret , m .- a . 2013 , , 762 , 57    , s. , kawka , a. , vaccaro , t.  r. , & silvestri , n.  m. 2009 , , 507 , 1613    , s. , thorstensen , j.  r. , kawka , a. , et  al . 2011 , , 737 , l16    , s.  e. & weaver , t.  a. 1994 , , 423 , 371 table [ tab : dat ] presents our radial velocity measurements . the table columns include object name , heliocentric julian date ( based on utc ) , heliocentric radial velocity ( uncorrected for the wd gravitational redshift ) , and velocity error .
Abstract:

Answer: we present the discovery of 17 low mass white dwarfs ( wds ) in short - period @xmath0 day binaries . our sample includes four objects with remarkable @xmath1 surface gravities and orbital solutions that require them to be double degenerate binaries . all of the lowest surface gravity wds have metal lines in their spectra implying long gravitational settling times or on - going accretion . notably , six of the wds in our sample have binary merger times @xmath210 gyr . four have @xmath30.9 @xmath4  companions . if the companions are massive wds , these four binaries will evolve into stable mass transfer am cvn systems and possibly explode as underluminous supernovae . if the companions are neutron stars , then these may be milli - second pulsar binaries . these discoveries increase the number of detached , double degenerate binaries in the elm survey to 54 ; 31 of these binaries will merge within a hubble time .


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: cognitive research deals with how people learn and solve problems  @xcite . at a coarse - grained level , there are three components of cognitive research : how do people acquire knowledge , how do they organize and retain the knowledge in memory ( brain ) and how do they retrieve this knowledge from memory in appropriate situations including to solve problems . these three components are strongly coupled , e.g. , how knowledge was organized and retained in memory during acquisition will determine how effectively it can be retrieved in different situations to solve problems . we can define problem solving as any purposeful activity where one must devise and perform a sequence of steps to achieve a set goal when presented with a novel situation . a problem can be quantitative or conceptual in nature .    using the findings of cognitive research , human memory can be broadly divided into two components : the working memory or the short term memory ( stm ) and the long term memory ( ltm ) . the long term memory is where the prior knowledge is stored . appropriate connections between prior knowledge in ltm and new knowledge that is being acquired at a given time can help an individual organize his / her knowledge hierarchically . such hierarchical organization can provide indexing of knowledge where more fundamental concepts are at the top of the hierarchy and the ancillary concepts are below them . similar to an index in a book , such indexing of knowledge in memory can be useful for accessing relevant knowledge while solving problems in diverse situations . it can also be useful for inferential recall when specific details may not be remembered . the working memory or stm is where information presented to an individual is processed . it is the conscious system that receives input from memory buffers associated with various sensory systems and can also receive input from the ltm . conscious human thought and problem solving involves rearranging and synthesizing ideas in stm using input from the sensory systems and ltm . one of the major initial findings of the cognitive revolution is related to miller s magic numbers 7@xmath02 ( 5 to 9 ) , i.e. , how much information can stm hold at one time . @xcite miller s research found that stm can only hold 5 to 9 pieces of information regardless of the iq of an individual . here is an easy way to illustrate this . if an individual is asked to memorize the following sequence of 25 numbers and letters in that order after staring at it for 30 seconds , it is a difficult task : 6829 - 1835 - 47dr - lpcf - ogb - twc - pvn . an individual typically only remembers between 5 to 9 things in this case . however , later research shows that people can extend the limits of their working memory by organizing disparate bits of information into chunks or patterns . @xcite using chunks , stm can evoke from ltm , highly complex information . an easy way to illustrate it is by asking an individual to memorize the following sequence of 25 numbers and letters : 1492 - 1776 - 1865 - 1945-aol - ibm - usa . this task is much easier if one recognizes that each of the four digit number is an important year in history and each of the three letters grouped together is a familiar acronym . thus , an individual only has to remember 7 separate chunks rather than 25 disparate bits . this chunking mechanism is supported by research in knowledge rich fields such as chess and physics where experts in a field have well organized knowledge . @xcite for example , research shows that if experts in chess are shown a very good chess board that corresponds to the game of a world - class chess player , they are able to assemble the board after it is disassembled because they are able to chunk the information on the board and remember the position of one piece with respect to another . if chess novices are shown the same board , they are only able to retrieve 5 - 9 pieces after it is jumbled up because they are not able to chunk large pieces of information present on the chess board . on the other hand , both chess experts and novices are poor at assembling a board on which the chess pieces are randomly placed before it was jumbled up . in this latter case , chess experts are unable to chunk the random information due to lack of pattern . a crucial difference between expert and novice problem solving is the manner in which knowledge is represented in their memory and the way it is retrieved to solve problems . experts in a field have well organized knowledge . they have large chunks of  compiled " knowledge in ltm and several pieces of knowledge can be accessed together as a chunk  @xcite . for example , for an expert in physics , vector addition , vector subtraction , displacement , velocity , speed , acceleration , force etc . can be accessed as one chunk while solving problems while they can be seven separate pieces of information for beginning students . if a problem involves all of these concepts , it may cause a cognitive overload if students stm can only hold 5 or 6 pieces of information . experts are comfortable going between different knowledge representations , e.g. , verbal , diagrammatic / pictorial , tabular etc . and employ representations that make problem solving easier . @xcite experts categorize problems based upon deep features unlike novices who can get distracted by context dependent features . for example , when physics professors and introductory physics students are asked to group together problems based upon similarity of solution , professors group them based upon physics concepts while students can choose categories that are dependent on contexts such as ramp problems , pulley problems , spring problems etc  @xcite . of course , an important goal of most physics courses is to help students develop expertise in problem solving and improve their reasoning skills . in order to help students , instructors must realize that the cognitive load , which is the amount of mental resources needed to solve a problem , is subjective  @xcite . the complexity of a problem not only depends on its inherent complexity but also on the expertise , experience and intuition of an individual  @xcite . it has been said that problems are either  impossible " or  trivial " . a ballistic pendulum problem that may be trivial for a physics professor may be very difficult for a beginning student  @xcite . cognitive load is higher when the context is abstract as opposed to concrete . the following wason tasks  @xcite are examples of abstract and concrete problems which are conceptually similar , but the abstract problem turns out to be cognitively more demanding . * you will lose your job unless you enforce the following rule :  if a person is rated k , then his / her document must be marked with a 3 " . + each card on the table for a person has a letter on one side and a number on the other side . indicate only the card(s ) shown in figure 1 that you definitely need to turn over to see if the document of any of these people violates this rule . + * you are serving behind the bar of a city centre pub and will lose your job unless you enforce the following rule :  if a person is drinking beer , then he / she must be over 18 years old " . + each person has a card on the table which has his / her age on one side and the name of his / her drink on the other side . indicate only the card(s ) shown in figure 2 that you definitely need to turn over to see if any of these people are breaking this rule . the correct answer for the abstract case is that you must turn the cards with k and 7 ( to make sure that there is no k on the other side ) . please note that the logic presented in the task is one sided in that it is ok for a document with a 3 to have anything on the other side . the correct answer for the concrete case is  beer " and  16 years old " , and it is much easier to identify these correct answers than the correct answers for the abstract case . a major reason for why the cognitive load is high during problem solving in physics is because the laws of physics are abstract . it is important to realize that it is not easy to internalize them unless concrete contexts are provided to the students . another difficulty is that , once the instructor has built an intuition about a problem , it may not appear difficult to him / her even if it is abstract . in such situations the instructor may overlook the cognitive complexity of the problem for a beginning student unless the instructor puts himself / herself in the students shoes . an important lesson from cognitive research is that new knowledge that an individual acquires builds on prior knowledge . this idea is commensurate with piaget s notion of  optimal mismatch "  @xcite or vygotsky s idea of  zone of proximal development " ( zpd )  @xcite . zpd is the zone defined by what a student can do on his / her own vs. with the help of a guide who is familiar with the student s initial knowledge and targets instruction somewhat above it continuously for effective learning . this is analogous to the impedance matching of a transformer in which the power transfer can be maximized if the input and output impedances are matched . another analogy is with light passing through two polarizers placed perpendicular to each other vs. having several polarizers stacked one after another where the transmission axes of adjacent polarizers are slightly different from each other . in the first case of crossed polarizer , no light passes through whereas in the second case most of the light passes through if the angle @xmath1 between the transmission axes of the adjacent polarizers is small enough . similarly , if the instruction is targeted significantly above students prior knowledge , learning wo nt be meaningful and even if the students make an effort to store some hap - hazardous information in their brain till the final exam , it will get  shampooed out " soon after that . on the other hand , if the instructional design takes into account students initial knowledge and builds on it , learning will be meaningful . another important lesson from cognitive research is that students must construct their own understanding . this implies that we should give students an opportunity to reconstruct , extend , and organize their knowledge . such opportunities will come from ensuring that the students are actively engaged in the learning process and take advantage of their own knowledge resources and also benefit from interactions with their peers . we now describe computer - based interactive problem solving tutorials that we have been developing that build on introductory physics students prior knowledge and keep them actively engaged in the learning process . the tutorials combine quantitative and conceptual problem solving . they focus on helping students develop a functional understanding of physics while learning useful skills  @xcite . it is worthwhile thinking about why quantitative problem solving alone often fails to help most students extend and organize their physics knowledge . without guidance , most students do not exploit the problem solving opportunity to reflect upon what they have actually learned and build a more robust knowledge structure . if only quantitative problems are asked , students often view them as  plug - and - chug " exercises , while conceptual problems alone are often viewed as guessing tasks with little connection to physics content . the interactive tutorials we have been developing combine quantitative and conceptual problem solving and provide guidance and support for knowledge and skill acquisition . they provide a structured approach to problem solving and promote active engagement while helping students develop self reliance . other computer - based tutorials are also being developed  @xcite . our tutorials are unique in that they focus on helping students learn effective problem solving strategies and the conceptual questions are developed based upon the common difficulties found via research on students difficulties in learning a particular topic in physics . a major goal of an introductory physics course for science and engineering majors is to enable students to develop complex reasoning and problem solving skills to explain and predict diverse phenomena in everyday experience . however , numerous studies show that students do not acquire these skills from a _ traditional _ course  @xcite . the problem can partly be attributed to the fact that the kind of reasoning that is usually learned and employed in everyday life is not systematic or rigorous . although such hap - hazardous reasoning may have little measurable negative consequences in an individual s personal life , it is insufficient to deal with the complex chain of reasoning that is required in rigorous scientific field such as physics  @xcite . educational research suggests that many introductory physics students solve problems using superficial clues and cues , applying concepts at random without thinking whether they are applicable or not  @xcite . also , most traditional courses do not _ explicitly _ teach students effective problem solving strategies . rather , they may reward inferior problem solving strategies in which many students engage . instructors often implicitly assume that students know that the analysis , planning , evaluation , and reflection phases of problem solving are as important as the implementation phase . consequently , they may not discuss these strategies explicitly while solving problems during the lecture . there is no mechanism in place to ensure that students make a conscious effort to interpret the concepts , make qualitative inferences from the quantitative problem solving tasks , or relate the new concepts to their prior knowledge .    in order to develop scientific reasoning by solving quantitative problems , students must learn to exploit problem solving as an opportunity for knowledge and skill acquisition . thus , students should not treat quantitative problem solving merely as a mathematical exercise but as a learning opportunity and they should engage in effective problem solving strategies . effective problem solving begins with a conceptual analysis of the problem , followed by planning of the problem solution , implementation and evaluation of the plan , and last but not least reflection upon the problem solving process . as the complexity of a physics problem increases , it becomes increasingly important to employ a systematic approach . in the qualitative or conceptual analysis stage , a student should draw a picture or a diagram and get a visual understanding of the problem . at this stage , a student should convert the problem to a representation that makes further analysis easier . after getting some sense of the situation , labeling all known and unknown numerical quantities is helpful in making reasonable physical assumptions . making predictions about the solution is useful at this level of analysis and it can help to structure the decision making at the next stage . the prediction made at this stage can be compared with the problem solution in the reflection phase and can help repair , extend and organize the student s knowledge structure . planning or decision making about the applicable physics principles is the next problem solving heuristic . this is the stage where the student brings everything together to come up with a reasonable solution . if the student performed good qualitative analysis and planning , the implementation of the plan becomes easy if the student possesses the necessary algebraic manipulation and mathematical skills . after implementation of the plan , a student must evaluate his / her solution , e.g. , by checking the dimension or the order of magnitude , or by checking whether the initial prediction made during the initial analysis stage matches the actual solution . one can also ask whether the solution is sensible and , possibly , consistent with experience . the reflection phase of problem solving is critical for learning and developing expertise . research indicates that this is one of the most neglected phase of problem solving  @xcite . without guidance , once a student has an answer , he / she typically moves on to the next problem . at the reflection stage , the problem solver must try to distill what he or she has learned from solving the problem . this stage of problem solving should be used as an opportunity for reflecting upon why a particular principle of physics is applicable to the problem at hand and how one can determine in the future that the same principle should be applicable even if the problem has a new context . the development of the computer - based tutorials to help students learn effective problem solving strategies is guided by a learning paradigm which involves three essential components : modeling , coaching , and weaning  @xcite . in this approach ,  modeling " means that the instructor demonstrates and exemplifies the skills that students should learn ( e.g. , how to solve physics problems systematically ) .  coaching " means providing students opportunity , guidance and practice so that they are actively engaged in learning the skills necessary for good performance .  weaning " means reducing the support and feedback gradually so as to help students develop self - reliance . each of the tutorials starts with an overarching problem which is quantitative in nature . before using a tutorial , students use a pre - tutorial worksheet which divides each quantitative problem given to them into different stages involved in problem solving . for example , in the conceptual analysis stage of problem solving , the worksheet explicitly asks students to draw a diagram , write down the given physical quantities , determine the target quantity , and predict some features of the solution . after attempting the problem on the worksheet to the best of their ability , students access the tutorial on the computer ( or use a paper version for evaluation purposes as discussed in the evaluation section below ) . the tutorial divides an overarching problem into several sub - problems , which are research - guided conceptual multiple - choice questions related to each stage of problem solving . the alternative choices in these multiple - choice questions elicit common difficulties students have with relevant concepts as determined by research in physics education . incorrect responses direct students to appropriate help sessions where students have the choice of video , audio or only written help with suitable explanations , diagrams , and equations . correct responses to the multiple - choice questions give students a choice of either advancing to the next sub - problem or directs them to the help session with the reasoning and explanation as to why the alternative choices are incorrect . while some reasonings are problem - specific , others focus on more general ideas . after students work on the implementation and assessment phase sub - problems posed in the multiple - choice format , they answer reflection sub - problems . these sub - problems focus on helping students reflect upon what they have learned and apply the concepts learned in different contexts . if students have difficulty answering these sub - problems , the tutorial provides further help and feedback . thus , the tutorials not only model or exemplify a systematic approach to problem solving , they also engage students actively in the learning process and provide feedback and guidance based upon their need . each tutorial problem is matched with other problems ( which we call paired problems ) that use similar physics principles but which are somewhat different in context . students can be given these paired problems as quizzes so that they learn to de - contextualize the problem solving approach and concepts learned from the tutorial . the paired problems play an important role in the weaning part of the learning model and ensure that students develop self - reliance and are able to solve problems based upon the same principle without help . these paired problems can also be assigned as homework problems and instructors can inform students that they can use the tutorials as a self - paced study tool if they have difficulty in solving the paired problems assigned as homework related to a particular topic . we have developed computer - based tutorials related to introductory mechanics , electricity , and magnetism . topics in mechanics include linear and rotational kinematics , newton s laws , work and energy , and momentum . topics in electricity and magnetism include coulomb s law , gauss s law , potential and potential energy , motion of charged particles in an electric field , motion of charged particles in a magnetic field , faraday s law , and lenz s law . figures 3 - 6 show screen captures from a computer - based tutorial which starts with a quantitative problem in which two blocks with masses @xmath2 and @xmath3 are in contact on a frictionless horizontal surface and a horizontal force @xmath4 is applied to the block with mass @xmath2 . students are asked to find the magnitude of force exerted by the block with mass @xmath3 on @xmath2 . we have found that this problem is sufficiently challenging for students in both algebra and calculus - based introductory physics courses that most students are unable to solve it without help . in the tutorial , the quantitative problem is broken down into several conceptual problems in the multiple - choice format that students have to answer . for example , one of the conceptual questions related to the initial analysis of the problem is shown in figure 3 along with a screen capture of a help session that a student is directed to if he / she chooses an incorrect response . figure 4 is a multiple - choice question about the free body diagram and figure 5 is a screen capture of a help screen in which an instructor explains relevant concepts to the students related to difficulty with the question asked in figure 4 . figure 6 is a help screen related to a reflection question in which students are asked about the force exerted by the block of mass @xmath2 on @xmath3 if the force of the hand @xmath4 was applied to the block of mass @xmath3 in the opposite direction ( instead of being applied to the block of mass @xmath2 as in the tutorial ) . below , we describe a case - study to evaluate the tutorials . in one case study , we compared three different groups who were given different aid tools :    * group ( 1 ) consists of students who used the tutorials as aid tool . * group ( 2 ) consists of students who were given the solved solutions for the tutorial problems which were similar to the solutions in the textbook s solutions manual . however , the solutions were not broken down into the multiple - choice questions with alternative choices targeting common misconceptions as was done in the tutorials . * group ( 3 ) consists of students who were given the textbook sections that dealt with the relevant concepts as the aid tool and were asked to brush up on the material for a quiz on a related topic . fifteen students were recruited and divided into two pools based upon their prior knowledge . then , the students from each of these pools were randomly assigned to one of the three groups discussed above .    during the interview session , students in each group initially answered a pre - questionnaire to determine their level of preparation , their views about problem solving in physics , and their perception of physics instruction . it was interesting to note that a majority of the students ( regardless of the group to which they belonged ) disagreed with the statement  when confronted with a physics problem , i first spend a reasonable amount of time planning how to solve the problem before actually solving it " . half of the students also agreed with the statement  physics problem solving is all about matching given quantities in the problem to the formula in the book " . half of the students thought that the pace of their introductory physics courses was very fast . after this pre - questionnaire , all students were given the following problem on a worksheet and were asked to solve it to the best of their ability before using their aid tools :    * _ an insulating sphere of radius @xmath5 has a spherical cavity of radius @xmath6 located within its volume and centered a distance @xmath7 from the center of the sphere . a cross section of the sphere is shown in figure 7 . the solid part of the insulating sphere has a uniform volume charge density @xmath8 . find the electric field @xmath9 at a point inside the cavity . _    all students identified the correct principle to use ( gauss s law ) when asked to solve the problem to the best of their ability on the worksheet . the above problem is challenging enough that none of the interviewed students could solve it without help . most students initially thought that the problem was relatively easy . except for one student who came up with a different incorrect answer , the rest of the students came up with the same incorrect answer : the electric field is zero everywhere inside the cavity . all of them invoked gauss s law , which states that the total electric flux through a closed surface is equal to the net charge inside the surface divided by @xmath10 . their reasoning for zero electric field in the cavity was based on the incorrect interpretation that whenever the electric flux through a closed surface is zero , the electric field at every point inside the surface must be zero too regardless of whether there was a symmetric charge distribution to justify such claims . thus , students drew a gaussian sphere inside the hole and concluded that the electric field must be zero everywhere inside since the enclosed charge is zero . students ignored the asymmetric charge distribution surrounding the cavity , which is a common difficulty . @xcite among many of the difficulties the interviewed students faced , one difficulty was not recognizing that the charge distribution was not symmetric enough and therefore the net electric field at a point inside the cavity can not be zero . when asked to show why the electric field should be zero everywhere inside , most students drew a spherical gaussian surface inside the hole , wrote down gauss s law in the integral form and pulled out the electric field from inside the integral . interviews show that many students believed that the electric field can always be pulled out from the surface integral regardless of the symmetry of the charge distribution . when pressed harder about why the electric field should be equal everywhere on the gaussian surface and why it can be pulled out of the integral , some students noted that one should not worry about this issue at least in this case since the zero charge enclosed implies zero electric field everywhere inside anyway . their convoluted reasoning showed that many students have difficulty in organizing different knowledge resources and applying them at the same time . after the students tried to solve the problem on the worksheet on their own to the best of their ability , students in group 1 were given the corresponding tutorial to work on , those in group 2 were given a textbook - style solution for the problem ( similar to the solutions in a textbook solution manual ) , and those in group 3 were given the section in the textbook , university physics by young and freedman , which deals with this topic . each student used his / her respective aid tool for the same amount of time ( 20 minutes ) . all students were told that they would have to solve a paired problem involving similar concepts after help from the tools they were provided ( tutorial , textbook - style solution , relevant chapter from textbook ) . all students were informed that aid tool was only for learning the material and could not be used while working on the paired problem they will be given later . the paired problem that followed tested whether students could transfer relevant knowledge acquired from the aid tools to the paired problem . @xcite for example , for the gauss s law problem discussed above , the paired problem was similar to the tutorial problem but was for an infinite solid insulating cylinder with a uniform volume charge and an asymmetric cylindrical cavity inside it . we used a rubric to grade students . the average performance of the tutorial group was approximately @xmath11 . all of them made the correct assumption that the electric field is not zero inside the cavity due to the asymmetry of the charge distribution and explained how gauss s law can not be used in such cases to conclude that the electric field is zero in the cavity . during the interviews , these students were able to explain verbally their thought processes and how they solved the problem to find the electric field . by analyzing the students thought processes during the interviews , it appears that the pattern of reasoning employed by these students was significantly better on an average than the reasoning of students from the other two groups . the other two groups did nt show as much improvement as the tutorial group when graded on a rubric after using the aids . between groups 2 and 3 , the students who used the textbook - style solution as a guide did better on the paired problem than those who used the relevant textbook section . the average performance of group 2 was approximately @xmath12 and group 3 was less than @xmath13 . students who used the textbook - style solution still had difficulties in solving the paired problem and four of them did not solve the entire problem correctly . the solution of the problem involves breaking the problem into subproblems each of which has a spherical symmetry and can be solved by known methods using gauss s law . most of the students in the second group ( those who were given a solution of the type given in solutions manual ) realized that they had to combine or superpose two electric fields . however , their most common difficulty was in using vectors in order to relate the final solution to the solutions to the two subproblems which have a spherical symmetry . the textbook - type solution showed them that calculating the electric field at a point in the cavity involved subtracting from the electric field due to the full insulating sphere as though there was no cavity , the electric field due to an insulating sphere of the size of the cavity . from the surveys given after the paired problem , some students mentioned that the textbook - style solutions did nt explain in words the steps used thoroughly . since the misconceptions students had at the beginning were not explicitly targeted by asking explicit questions in the textbook - type solution ( as was done explicitly in the multiple - choice questions which were part of the tutorials ) , students did not transfer relevant knowledge from the solved example to the paired problem as well as the tutorial group did . all of the students who made use of the textbook as an aid for learning ( rather than the tutorial or the solved example ) did poorly on the paired problem . this finding is consistent with another study that shows that unless introductory physics students have seen solved examples . @xcite students in this group realized that the problem solution could not be that the magnitude of the electric field inside the cavity is @xmath14 because otherwise they would not be given 20 minutes to browse over the section of the textbook trying to formulate a solution . but the responses they provided after browsing over the book were often difficult to understand and dimensionally incorrect . when asked to explain what they had done , students noted that they were not very sure about how to solve the problem . they added that the relevant section of the textbook did not help because it did not have a solved example exactly like the problem that was asked . people do not automatically acquire usable knowledge by spending lots of time on task . limited capacity of stm can make cognitive load high for beginning students . for learning to be meaningful , students should be actively engaged in the learning process . moreover , it is important to consider the difficulty of a problem from students perspective and build on their prior knowledge . we are developing computer - based interactive tutorials for introductory mechanics and electricity and magnetism that are suited for a wide variety of students . the self - paced tutorials combine quantitative and conceptual problem solving . they engage students actively in the learning process and provide feedback based upon their needs . they focus on helping students learn problem solving and reasoning skills while helping them build a more coherent knowledge structure related to physics . they can be used as a self - study tool by students . the paired problems can be incorporated into regular quizzes or assigned as homework problems . we thank daniel haileselassie and josh bilak for help in the development and evaluation of the tutorials and thank f. reif , j. levy , and r. devaty for helpful discussions . we are grateful to the nsf for award due-0442087 . national reserach council , _ how people learn : bridging research and practice _ , committee on learning research and educational practices , eds . m. donovan , j. bransford , and j. pellegrino , national academy press , washington , dc , 1999 ; national reserach council , _ how people learn : brain , mind , experience and school _ , committee on developments in science on learning , eds . j. bransford , a. brown and r. cocking , national academy press , washington , dc , 1999 ; h. a. simon , and c. a. kaplan , _ foundations of cognitive science _ , ( m. i. posner editor , mit press , 1989 ) ; j. r. anderson , _ the adaptive character of thought _ , hillsdale , nj : lawrence erlbaum , 1990 ; j. anderson and c. lebiere , _ atomic components of thoughts _ , mahwah nj : lawrence erlbaum , 1998 ; a. newell , _ unified theories of cognition _ , cambridge , ma : harvard university press , 1990 ; a. newell and h. simon , _ human problem solving _ , englewood cliffs nj : prentice hall , 1972 ; e. thorndike , _ human learning _ , new york : century , 1931 ; r. d. tennyson and r. l. elmore , _ learning theory foundations for instructional design _ in instructional design : international perspectives , ( vol . 1 : theory , research , models ) , r. d. tennyson , f. schott , n. seel , and s. dijkstra , mhawah , nj : lawr . erlb . , 1997 ; r. g. glaser , _ education and thinking : the role of knowledge _ , am . psychologist , * 39 * , 93 - 104 , ( 1984 ) . f. reif , _ scientific approaches to science education _ , phys . today * 39 * , 48 , 1986 ; f. reif , _ interpretation of scientific or mathematical concepts : cognitive issues and instructional implications _ * 11 * , 395 , 1987 ; f. reif and s. allen , _ cognition of interpreting scientific concepts : a study of acceleration _ , cognition and instruction * 9(1 ) * , 1 - 44 , ( 1992 ) ; j. mestre and j. touger , _ cognitive research - what s in it for physics teachers ? _ , phys . teach . * 27 * , 447 ( 1989 ) ; e. f. redish , _ implications of cognitive studies for teaching physics _ , am . j. phys . * 62 * , 796 , 1994 ; e. redish , _ teaching physics with the physics suite _ , wiley , 2003 . h. simon , _ how big is a chunk ? _ , science , * 183 * ( 4124 ) , 482 - 488 , 1974 ; p. kyllonen and r. christal , _ reasoning ability is ( little more than ) working memory capacity ? ! _ , intelligence , * 14 * , 389 - 433 , 1990 ; a. baddeley , _ working memory _ , oxford : clarendon press / oxford university press , 1986 ; m. miyake , m. just and p. carpenter , _ working memory contraints on the resolution of lexical ambiguity : maintaining multiple interpretationsin neutral contexts _ , j. memory and language , * 33(2 ) * , 175 - 202 , 1994 ; a. fry , s. hale , _ processing speed , working memory and fluid intelligence : evidence for a developmental cascade _ , psychological science , * 7(4 ) * , 237 - 241 , 1996 ; r. kail and t. salthouse , _ processing speed as a mental capacity _ , acta psychologica , * 86 * , 199 - 225 , 1994 . w. chase and h. simon , _ the mind s eye in chess _ , in visual information processing , ed . w. chase , new york : academic press , 1973 w. chase and h. simon , _ perception in chess _ , cognitive psychology , * 4 * , 55 - 81 , 1973 ; f. gobert and h. simon , _ recall of random and distorted chess positions : implication of the theory of expertise _ , memory and cognition , * 24(4 ) * , 493 - 503 , 1996 ; p. rosenbloom and a. newell , _ learning by chunking : a production system model of practice _ , in production system models of learning and development , eds . d. klahr and p. langley , cambridge , ma : mit press , pp . 221 - 286 , 1987 ; d. broadbent , _ the magic number severn after fifteen years _ , in eds . a. kennedy and a. wilkes , studies in long term memory , ny : wilet , 1975 . j. larkin , and h. simon , _ why a diagram is ( sometimes ) worth ten thousand words _ , in h. a. simon , models of thought ( yale univ . press , new haven ) , vol . ii , pp . 413 - 437 ( 1989 ) ; j. larkin , _ understanding , problem representations , and skill in physics _ in s. f. chipman , j. w. segal and r. glaser ( eds . ) , thinking and learning skills ( lawrence erl . , hillsdale , nj ) , * 2 * , pp . 141 - 159 ( 1985 ) ; j. kaput , _ representation and problem solving : methodological issues related to modeling _ , e. a. silver ( ed . ) , in teaching and learning mathematical problem solving : multiple research perspectives , lawrence erl . , hillsale , nj , pp . 381 - 398 , 1985 ; d. norman , _ things that make us smart _ , addison - wesley , p. 49 , 1993 ; j. zhang , _ the nature of external representations in problem solving _ , cog . 21 , 179 - 217 ( 1997 ) ; j. zhang , and d. norman , " representations in distributed cognitive tasks , cog . , 18 , 87 - 122 ( 1994 ) ; k. reusser , _ tutoring systems and pedagogical theory : representational tools for understanding , planning , and reflection in problem solving _ , in s. lajoie and s. derry ( eds . ) , computer as cognitive tools , lawrence erl . , hillsdale , nj , 1993 ; t. de jong and m. ferguson - hessler , _ cognitive structure of good and poor problem solvers in physics _ psych . * 78 * , 279 - 288 ( 1986 ) ; h. simon , _ on the forms of mental representation _ , in c. savage ( ed . ) , minnesota studies in the philosophy of science ( univ . minnesota press , minneapolis ) , vol . ix , _ perception and cognition : issues in the foundations of psychology _ ( 1978 ) ; h. simon and d. simon , _ individual differences in solving physics problems _ , in models of thought , vol . ii , yale univ . press , ( 1989 ) . m. t. h. chi , p. j. feltovich , and r. glaser , _ categorization and representation of physics knowledge by experts and novices _ , cog . sci . * 5 * , 121 - 152 ( 1981 ) ; p. w. cheng and k. j. holyoak , _ pragmatic reasoning schema _ , cognitive psychology , * 17 * , 391 - 416 , 1985 ; k. johnson and c. mervis , _ effects of varying the levels of expertise on the basic level of categorization _ , 1997 ; p. johnson - laird , _ psychology of reasoning , structure and content _ , cambridge , ma , 1972 ; s. marshall , _ schemas in problem solving _ , new york , ny : cambridge university press , 1995 ; d. bobrow and d. norman , _ some principles of memory schemata _ , in representation and understanding : studies in cognitive science , eds . d. bobrow and a. collins , new york : academic press , pp 131 - 149 , 1975 . b. eylon , and f. reif ,  effect of knowledge organization on task performance " , cognition and instruction * 1 * , 5 ( 1984 ) ; j. i. heller , and f. reif , _ prescribing effective human problem solving processes : problem description in physics _ , cognition and instruction , * 1 * , 177 , ( 1984 ) . m. chi , r. glaser , and e. rees , _ expertise in problem solving _ , in advances in the psychology of human intelligence , vol . 7 - 75 , r. j. sternberg ( editor ) , hillsdale , nj : lawrence erlbaum ( 1982 ) ; r. e. mayer , _ thinking , probelm solving , cognition _ , second edition , new york : freeman , 1992 ; j. larkin , j. mcdermott , d. simon , and h. simon , _ expert and novice performance in solving physics problems _ , science * 208 * , 1335 - 1362 ( 1980 ) ; j. larkin , _ the role of problem representation in physics _ , in d. gentner and a. l. stevens ( eds . ) , mental models ( lawrence erlbaum , hillsdale , nj ) , pp . 75 - 98 ( 1983 ) ; j. larkin , _ cognition of learning physics _ * 49(6 ) * , 534 - 541 , ( 1981 ) ; j. larkin , _ skilled problem solving in physics : a hierarchical planning approach _ , j. of structured learn . * 6 * , 121 - 130 ( 1980 ) ; a. h. schoenfeld , _ mathematical problem solving _ , new york : academic press , 1985 ; a. h. schoenfeld , _ teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving _ , pp . 83 - 103 , in toward the thinking curriculum : current cognitive research ( l. b. resnick and b. l. klopfer eds . ) , washington , dc : ascd , 1989 ; a. schoenfeld and d. j. herrmann , _ problem perception and knowledge structure in expert novice mathematical problem solvers _ , j. exp . psych . , learning , memory , and cognition * 8 * , 484 - 494 ( 1982 ) ; y. anzai and t. yokoyama , _ internal models in physics problem solving _ , cognition and instruction * 1(4 ) * , 397 - 450 , ( 1984 ) ; c. schunn and j. anderson , _ acquiring expertise in science : explorations of what , when and how _ , in designing for science , implications from everyday , classroom and professional settings , eds . k. crowley , c. d. schuun and t. okada , lawrence erlbaum , 2001 . j. sweller , _ cognitive load during problem solving : effects on learning _ , cognitive science * 12 * , 257 , 1988 ; j. sweller , r. mawer , and m. ward , _ development of expertise in mathematical problem solving _ , j. exptal . psychology : general * 112 * , 639 , 1983 . p. wason , _ reasoning about a rule _ , quarterly journal of experimental psychology , * 20 * , 273 - 281 , 1968 ; p. wason and p. johnson - laird , _ psychology of reasoning : structure and content _ , cambridge , ma : harvard university press , 1972 . h. ginsberg , and s. opper , _ piaget s theory of intellectual development _ , englewood cliffs , prentice hall , n.j . , 1969 ; r. gorman , _ discovering piaget : a guide for teachers _ , merrill , columbus , 1972 ; j. piaget , _ the language and thought of a child _ , ny : meridian , ( 1974 ) ; j. piaget , _ success and understanding _ , cambridge , ma : harvard university press , 1978 ; a. lawson , _ a review of research on formal reasoning and science teaching _ , j. research in science teaching , * 22(7 ) * , 569 - 617 , 1985 . l. vygotsky , _ mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes _ , harvard university press , 1978 ; j. wertsch , _ mind in action _ , ny : oxford university press , ( 1998 ) ; j. valsiner , and r. van der veer , _ the encoding of distance : the concept of the zone of proximal development and its interpretations_. in ( r. r. cocking and k. a. renninger eds . ) the development and meaning of psychological distance ( pp 35 - 62 ) , hillsdale , nj : lawrence erlbaum associates .    c. singh ,  interactive video tutorials for enhancing problem solving , reasoning , and meta - cognitive skills of introductory physics students " , proceedings of the 2003 physics education research conference , edited by j. marx , s. franklin and k. cummings , aip conf . proc . , volume 720 , melville , new york , 177 - 180 , 2004 . for example , see http://www.andes.pitt.edu/ , http://www.webassign.net , http://www.masteringphysics.com      a. collins , j. brown , and s. newman , _ cognitive apprenticeship : teaching the crafts of reading , writing and mathematics _ , in l. b. resnick ( ed . ) ,  knowing , learning , and instruction : essays in honor of robert glaser " , hillsdale , nj : lawrence erlbaum . , 453 - 494 , ( 1989 ) . m. gick and k. holyoak , _ the cognitive basis of knowledge transfer _ , in transfer of learning : contemporary research and applications , cornier @xmath15 hagman ( eds . ) , new york , academic press ( 1987 ) ; m. gick and k. holyoak , _ schema induction and analogical transfer _ , cognitive psychology , * 15 * , 1 - 38 , 1983 ; k. holyoak , _ the pragmatics of analogical transfer _ , in the psychology of learning and motivation , ed . g. bower , ( vol . 19 ) , new york : academic press , 1985 ; k. holyoak and p. thagard , _ mental leaps : analogy in creative thought _ , cambridge , ma : mit press , 1995 ; r. dufresne , j. mestre , t. thaden - koch , w. gerace and w. leonard , _ knowledge representation and coordination in the transfer process _ 155 - 215 , in transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective , j. p. mestre ( ed . ) , 393 pages , greenwich , ct : information age publishing , ( 2005 ) ; j. lobato , _ how design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa _ , educational researcher , 32(1 ) , 17 - 20 , ( 2003 ) ; j. lobato , _ alternative perspectives on the transfer of learning : history , issues and challenges for future research _ , j. learning sciences , * 15(4 ) * , 431 - 439 , ( 2006 ) ; d. j. ozimek , p. v. engelhardt , a. g. bennett , n. s. rebello , _ retention and transfer from trigonometry to physics _ , proceedings of the physics education research conference , eds . j. marx , p. heron , s. franklin , 173 - 176 , ( 2004 ) ; j. d. bransford and d. schwartz , _ rethinking transfer : a simple proposal with multiple implications _ , review of research in education , * 24 * , 61 - 100 , ( 1999 ) ; l. novick , _ analogical transfer , problem similarity and expertise _ , j. experimental psychology : learning , memory and cognition , * 14(3 ) * , 510 - 520 , ( 1988 ) .    c. singh , assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems , part ii : examining the effect of some potential factors on problem solving and transfer " , phys . . res . * 4 * , 010105 , ( 2008 ) .
Abstract:

Answer: one finding of cognitive research is that people do not automatically acquire usable knowledge by spending lots of time on task . because students knowledge hierarchy is more fragmented , `` knowledge chunks '' are smaller than those of experts . the limited capacity of short term memory makes the cognitive load high during problem solving tasks , leaving few cognitive resources available for meta - cognition . the abstract nature of the laws of physics and the chain of reasoning required to draw meaningful inferences makes these issues critical . in order to help students , it is crucial to consider the difficulty of a problem from the perspective of students . we are developing and evaluating interactive problem - solving tutorials to help students in the introductory physics courses learn effective problem - solving strategies while solidifying physics concepts . the self - paced tutorials can provide guidance and support for a variety of problem solving techniques , and opportunity for knowledge and skill acquisition . address = department of physics and astronomy , university of pittsburgh , pittsburgh , pennsylvania , 15260