MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The expansion and radio spectral index of G21.5−0.9: is PSR J1833−1034 the youngest pulsar?

2008· article· en· W2012051968 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsarSupernova remnantSpectral indexSupernovaTorusCrab PulsarMillisecond pulsarRadio spectrum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report on new 5-GHz Very Large Array (VLA) radio observations of the pulsar-powered supernova remnant G21.5−0.9. These observations have allowed us to make a high-quality radio image of this remnant with a resolution of ∼0.7 arcsec. It has a filamentary structure similar to that seen in the Crab Nebula. Radio structure suggestive of the torus seen around the Crab pulsar is tentatively identified. We also compared the new image with one taken ∼15 yr earlier at 1.5 GHz, both to find the expansion speed of the remnant and to make a spectral index image. Between 1991 and 2006, we find that the average expansion rate of the remnant is 0.11 ± 0.02 per cent yr−1, corresponding, for a distance of 5 kpc, to a speed of 910 ± 160 km s−1 with respect to the centre of the nebula. Assuming undecelerated expansion, this expansion speed implies that the age of G21.5−0.9 is 870+200−150 yr, which makes PSR J1833−1034 one of the youngest, if not the youngest, known pulsars in the Galaxy.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations66
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207