MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rates of reconnection in pulsar winds

2002· preprint· en· W1558696130 on OpenAlexaff
Maxim Lyutikov

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2002
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetic reconnectionPulsarPlasmaInflowAstrophysicsPolar capToroidFlux (metallurgy)GeophysicsComputational physicsMechanicsIonosphereNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the formulation of relativistic reconnection by Lyutikov & Uzdensky (2002) we estimate the upper possible rates of reconnection in pulsar winds using Bohm prescription for resistivity. We find that the velocity of plasma inflow into the reconnection layer may be relativistic, of the order of the speed of light in the plasma rest-frame. This in principle may allow efficient dissipation of the magnetic field energy in the wind and/or destruction of the toroidal magnetic flux. The efficiency of reconnection realized in pulsar winds remains an open question: it should depend both on the microphysical properties of plasma and on the three-dimensional structure of the reconnection flow.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.130 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207