Multiscale analysis of the gradient of linear polarization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a new multiscale method to calculate the amplitude of the gradient of the linear polarization vector, |$|\nabla \boldsymbol {P}|$|, using a wavelet-based formalism. We demonstrate this method using a field of the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey and show that the filamentary structure typically seen in |$|\nabla \boldsymbol {P}|$| maps depends strongly on the instrumental resolution. Our analysis reveals that different networks of filaments are present on different angular scales. The wavelet formalism allows us to calculate the power spectrum of the fluctuations seen in |$|\nabla \boldsymbol {P}|$| and to determine the scaling behaviour of this quantity. The power spectrum is found to follow a power law with γ ≈ 2.1. We identify a small drop in power between scales of 80 ≲ l ≲ 300 arcmin, which corresponds well to the overlap in the u–v plane between the Effelsberg 100-m telescope and the Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory 26-m telescope data. We suggest that this drop is due to undersampling present in the 26-m telescope data. In addition, the wavelet coefficient distributions show higher skewness on smaller scales than at larger scales. The spatial distribution of the outliers in the tails of these distributions creates a coherent subset of filaments correlated across multiple scales, which trace the sharpest changes in the polarization vector |$\boldsymbol {P}$| within the field. We suggest that these structures may be associated with highly compressive shocks in the medium. The power spectrum of the field excluding these outliers shows a steeper power law with γ ≈ 2.5.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".