Combining the second data release of the European Pulsar Timing Array with low-frequency pulsar data
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Context. Low radio frequency data are highly valuable for enhancing the sensitivity of pulsar timing arrays (PTAs) to propagation effects, such as dispersion measure (DM) variations. These low-frequency observations are particularly sensitive to DM fluctuations and can therefore significantly improve noise characterization in PTA datasets, which is essential for detecting the stochastic gravitational wave background (GWB). Aims. For this work we incorporated for the first time low-frequency observations from LOFAR (100 − 200 MHz) and NenuFAR (30 − 90 MHz) into a PTA context by combining them with the most recent data release from the European and Indian PTAs (in particular, with the subsample labeled DR2new+ , which includes only data from the new backends). This new combined dataset, labeled DR2low , consists of 12 pulsars observed over a time span of ∼11 years, with radio frequencies spanning the range 30 − 2500 MHz. The expanded frequency coverage of DR2low enables us to update and refine the noise models of DR2new+ , and this is crucial in order to increase the PTA sensitivity when searching for the stochastic gravitational wave background, which is the primary goal of PTA observations. This work is a milestone in the integration of low-frequency data into the upcoming third data release of the International PTA, which is posed to achieve the 5 σ detection of the GWB. Methods. We used the pulsar timing software packages L IBSTEMPO and E NTERPRISE to perform a noise analysis of DR2low . At first, we applied a standard noise model including red noise (RN) and time-variable dispersion measure (DMv) as power laws, with Fourier components up to 30 and 100 frequencies, respectively. Next, we performed a fully Bayesian model selection to identify the favored noise model for each pulsar and compute the Bayes factors across all combinations of RN, DMv, and a noise term with a chromatic index of 4 (CN 4 ). Finally, we carried out a detailed analysis on the choice of the chromatic index for CN 4 and the contribution of the solar wind. Results. The comparison between DR2low and DR2new+ using the standard noise model highlights the benefits of including low-frequency data. In particular, the additional frequency coverage improves the constraints on the DM variations and helps disentangle the DM and RN noise components in most pulsars. Through a Bayesian model selection, we found that the RN is required in the final model for 10 out of 12 pulsars, compared to only 5 in the DR2new+ dataset. The improved sensitivity to plasma effects provided by DR2low also favors the identification of significant CN 4 in eight pulsars, while none showed such evidence in DR2new+ . The chromatic index of this process is consistent with four of the five pulsars, while two (PSRs J0030+0451 and J1022+1001) show significant deviations from such a value. We attribute this discrepancy to unmodeled contributions from the solar wind, especially because of the high DM sensitivity of LOFAR and NenuFAR and the high observing cadence provided by these datasets near solar conjunction. A dedicated analysis confirms that the current solar wind model fails to fully capture the observed delay, and residual power is absorbed into the DM component of the model.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».