MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984582474 · doi:10.1086/374266

The Pulsar Wind Nebula in G11.2−0.3

2003· article· en· W1984582474 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsarNebulaPulsar wind nebulaSupernova remnantEmission nebulaHeliosphereSynchrotronMillisecond pulsarObservatory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an X-ray and radio study of the wind nebula surrounding the central pulsar PSR J1811-1925 in the supernova remnant G11.2-0.3. Using high-resolution data obtained with the Chandra X-Ray Observatory and with the VLA radio telescope, we show the X-ray and radio emission is asymmetric around the pulsar, despite the latter's central position in the very circular shell. The new X-ray data allow us to separate the synchrotron emission of the pulsar wind nebula from the surrounding thermal emission and that from the pulsar itself. On the basis of X-ray data from two epochs, we observe temporal variation of the location of X-ray hot spots near the pulsar, indicating relativistic motion. We compare thermal emission observed within the shell, which may be associated with the forward shock of the pulsar wind nebula, to thermal emission from a nearby portion of the remnant shell, the temperature of which implies an expansion velocity consistent with the identification of the remnant with the historical event of 386 A.D. The measured X-ray and radio spectral indices of the nebula synchrotron emission are found to be consistent with a single synchrotron cooling break. The magnetic field implied by the break frequency is anomalously large, given the apparent size and age of the nebula, if a spherical morphology is assumed but is consistent with a bipolar morphology.

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)0.000
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations64
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207