MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987883530 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423995

Estimating extragalactic Faraday rotation

2014· article· en· W1987883530 on OpenAlexaff
Niels Oppermann, H. Junklewitz, Maksim Greiner, T. A. Enßlin, Takuya Akahori, E. Carretti, B. M. Gaensler, A. Goobar, Lisa Harvey-Smith, M. Johnston‐Hollitt, Luke Pratley, D. H. F. M. Schnitzeler, J. M. Stil, V. Vacca

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceAustralian Research CouncilDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsFaraday effectPhysicsDegeneracy (biology)Rotation (mathematics)Probabilistic logicAstrophysicsSkyPoint (geometry)Noise (video)AlgorithmMagnetic fieldComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observations of Faraday rotation for extragalactic sources probe magnetic fields both inside and outside the Milky Way. Building on our earlier estimate of the Galactic contribution, we set out to estimate the extragalactic contributions. We discuss the problems involved; in particular, we point out that taking the difference between the observed values and the Galactic foreground reconstruction is not a good estimate for the extragalactic contributions. We point out a degeneracy between the contributions to the observed values due to extragalactic magnetic fields and observational noise and comment on the dangers of over-interpreting an estimate without taking into account its uncertainty information. To overcome these difficulties, we develop an extended reconstruction algorithm based on the assumption that the observational uncertainties are accurately described for a subset of the data, which can overcome the degeneracy with the extragalactic contributions. We present a probabilistic derivation of the algorithm and demonstrate its performance using a simulation, yielding a high quality reconstruction of the Galactic Faraday rotation foreground, a precise estimate of the typical extragalactic contribution, and a well-defined probabilistic description of the extragalactic contribution for each data point. We then apply this reconstruction technique to a catalog of Faraday rotation observations for extragalactic sources. The analysis is done for several different scenarios, for which we consider the error bars of different subsets of the data to accurately describe the observational uncertainties. By comparing the results, we argue that a split that singles out only data near the Galactic poles is the most robust approach. We find that the dispersion of extragalactic contributions to observed Faraday depths is most likely lower than 7 rad/m2, in agreement with earlier results, and that the extragalactic contribution to an individual data point is poorly constrained by the data in most cases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations180
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207