MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quark nova imprint in the extreme supernova explosion SN 2006gy

2012· article· en· W1753306980 on OpenAlexaff
Rachid Ouyed, M. Kostka, Nico Koning, D. A. Leahy, W. Steffen

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSupernovaAstrophysicsEjectaLight curvePair-instability supernovaAstronomyNova (rocket)HypernovaNeutron star

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extremely luminous supernova 2006gy (SN 2006gy) is among the most energetic ever observed. The peak brightness was 100 times that of a typical supernova and it spent an unheard of 250 d at magnitude −19 or brighter. Efforts to describe SN 2006gy have pushed the boundaries of current supernova theory. In this work we aspire to simultaneously reproduce the photometric and spectroscopic observations of SN 2006gy using a quark nova (QN) model. This analysis considers the supernova explosion of a massive star followed days later by the QN detonation of a neutron star. We lay out a detailed model of the interaction between the supernova envelope and the QN ejecta paying special attention to a mixing region which forms at the inner edge of the supernova envelope. This model is then fitted to photometric and spectroscopic observations of SN 2006gy. This QN model naturally describes several features of SN 2006gy including the late-stage light-curve plateau, the broad Hα line and the peculiar blue Hα absorption. We find that a progenitor mass between 20 and 40 M⊙ provides ample energy to power SN 2006gy in the context of a QN.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations32
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207