MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967176793 · doi:10.1086/513712

Lost and Found: A New Position and Infrared Counterpart for the X‐Ray Binary Scutum X‐1

2007· article· en· W1967176793 on OpenAlexaff
D. L. Kaplan, Alan M. Levine, Deepto Chakrabarty, E. Morgan, Dawn K. Erb, B. M. Gaensler, Dae‐Sik Moon, P. B. Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsX-ray binaryNeutron starExtinction (optical mineralogy)SupergiantBinary numberInfraredX-rayPulsarAstronomyOpticsStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using archival X-ray data, we find that the catalog location of the X-ray binary Scutum X-1 (Sct X-1) is incorrect and that the correct location is that of the X-ray source AX J183528-0737, which is 15' to the west. Our identification is made on the basis of the 112 s pulse period for this object detected in an XMM-Newton observation, as well as spatial coincidence between AX J183528-0737 and previous X-ray observations. Based on the XMM-Newton data and archival RXTE data, we confirm secular spin-down over 17 yr with period derivative ≈ 3.9 × 10 -9 s s -1 , but do not detect a previously reported X-ray iron fluorescence line. We identify a bright ( K s = 6.55) red ( J - K s = 5.51) optical and infrared counterpart to AX J183528-0737 from 2MASS, a number of mid-IR surveys, and deep optical observations, which we use to constrain the extinction to and distance of Sct X-1. From these data, as well as limited near-IR spectroscopy, we conclude that Sct X-1 is most likely a binary system composed of a late-type giant or supergiant and a neutron star.

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 score0.005
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
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations37
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207