MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1771941917 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1105.1689

Polar Broad Absorption Line Quasars: An Open Question

2011· preprint· en· W1771941917 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick B. Hall, L. S. Chajet

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2011
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperluminal motionQuasarPhysicsVery-long-baseline interferometryAstrophysicsBrightnessAstrophysical jetFlux (metallurgy)Line-of-sightJet (fluid)Brightness temperatureActive galactic nucleusAbsorption (acoustics)AstronomyOpticsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been argued that certain broad absorption line quasars are viewed within 35 degrees of the axis of a relativistic radio jet, based on two-epoch radio flux density variability. It is true if the surface brightness of a radio source is observed to change by a sufficiently large amount, the inferred brightness temperature will exceed 10^12 K and Doppler beaming in our direction must be invoked to avoid a Compton cooling catastrophe. However, flux density changes cannot be linked to surface brightness changes without knowledge of the size of the source. If an optically thick source changes in projected area but not surface brightness, its brightness temperature is constant and its flux variability yields no constraint on its orientation. Moreover, as pointed out by Rees, spherical expansion of an emission source at relativistic speeds yields an apparently superluminal increase in its projected area, which can explain short-timescale flux density variability without requiring a relativistic jet oriented near to our line of sight. Therefore, two-epoch radio flux density variability by itself cannot unambiguously identify sources with jets directed towards us. Only VLBI imaging can robustly determine the fraction of broad absorption line quasars which are polar.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207