MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494949378 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slv124

Non-cosmological FRBs from young supernova remnant pulsars

2016· article· en· W1494949378 on OpenAlexafffund
Liam Connor, Jonathan Sievers, Ue‐Li Pen

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsSupernovaPulsarSupernova remnantAstronomySupergiantGalaxyEjectaCosmic microwave backgroundStarsAnisotropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a new extra but non-cosmological explanation for fast radio bursts (FRBs) based on very young pulsars in supernova remnants. Within a few hundred years of a core-collapse supernova, the ejecta is confined within ∼1 pc, providing a high enough column density of free electrons for the observed 375–1600 pc cm−3 of dispersion measure (DM). By extrapolating a Crab-like pulsar to its infancy in an environment like that of SN 1987A, we hypothesize such an object could emit supergiant pulses sporadically which would be bright enough to be seen at a few hundred megaparsecs. We hypothesize that such supergiant pulses would preferentially occur early in the pulsar's life when the free electron density is still high, which is why we do not see large numbers of moderate DM FRBs (≲300 pc cm−3). In this scenario, Faraday rotation at the source gives rotation measures (RMs) much larger than the expected cosmological contribution. If the emission were pulsar-like, then the polarization vector could swing over the duration of the burst, which is not expected from non-rotating objects. In this model, the scattering, large DM, and commensurate RM all come from one place which is not the case for the cosmological interpretation. The model also provides testable predictions of the flux distribution and repeat rate of FRBs, and could be furthermore verified by spatial coincidence with optical supernovae of the past several decades and cross-correlation with nearby galaxy maps.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations137
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207