MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987716798 · doi:10.1086/318896

A New Radio–X-Ray Probe of Galaxy Cluster Magnetic Fields

2001· article· en· W1987716798 on OpenAlexaff
T. E. Clarke, P. P. Kronberg, H. Böhringer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsROSATPhysicsCluster (spacecraft)Galaxy clusterRedshiftLuminosityMagnetic fieldFaraday effectCooling flowGalaxyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results are presented of a new VLA- ROSAT study that probes the magnetic field strength and distribution over a sample of 16 "normal" low-redshift ( z ≤ 0.1) galaxy clusters. The clusters span 2 orders of magnitude in X-ray luminosity and were selected to be free of (unusual) strong radio cluster halos and widespread cooling flows. Consistent with these criteria, most clusters show a relaxed X-ray morphology and little or no evidence of recent merger activity. Analysis of the rotation measure (RM) data shows cluster-generated Faraday RM excess out to ~0.5 h Mpc from cluster centers. The results, combined with RM imaging of cluster-embedded sources and ROSAT X-ray profiles, indicate that the hot intergalactic gas within these "normal" clusters is permeated with a high filling factor by magnetic fields at levels of icm = 5-10(ℓ/10 kpc) -1/2 h μG, where ℓ is the field correlation length. These results lead to a global estimate of the total magnetic energy in clusters and give new insight into the ultimate energy origin, which is likely gravitational. These results also shed some light on the cluster evolutionary conditions that existed at the onset of cooling flows.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations542
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207