The eclipsing millisecond pulsar PSR J1740-5340 and its red straggler companion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a high-resolution echelle spectrum taken with the Very Large Telescope and analyse archival Hubble Space Telescope photometry of the recently identified companion of the eclipsing millisecond radio pulsar PSR J1740-5340 in the globular cluster NGC 6397. From the spectrum, we show that the companion is metal poor, as expected for a member of NGC 6397. Using synthetic photometry, and assuming a true distance modulus of mag and a colour excess of , we derive a radius of and an effective temperature of , implying a luminosity of ( errors). These properties make it similar to the so-called “sub-subgiants” in the old open cluster M 67 and “red stragglers” in 47 Tuc, which have luminosities comparable to those of turn-off stars, but cooler temperatures and larger radii. The light curve of the companion is well described by ellipsoidal variations, and despite the incomplete (~60%) phase coverage, we are able to derive good constraints on a number of the system parameters. In particular, for the inclination we find a 2-σ lower limit of ( at 3σ). Assuming a pulsar mass of , this implies a companion mass in the range . Combined with the photometric constraint, we find a best fit for and . We infer a Roche lobe filling factor by radius of ~97%. Surprisingly, we find no evidence whatsoever for irradiation of the companion, despite the high inferred rotational energy loss of the pulsar (). We discuss possible reasons, but find most lacking. We hypothesise that the system is a triple, and that the acceleration due to a third body in a wide orbit around the binary led to an overestimate of the intrinsic spin-down rate and hence the spin-down luminosity. This can be tested by further timing observations. We also discuss two other puzzles, viz., the system's location far outside the cluster core and the companion's large radius and luminosity. We suggest that the system was formed in a binary-binary encounter in the core, due to which the system acquired a substantial velocity, and the companion – which must have been a somewhat evolved turn-off star – lost much of its envelope. We suggest other “red stragglers” and “sub-subgiants” might have formed by similarly drastic encounters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".