MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017667374 · doi:10.1086/309203

The 35 Day Evolution of the Hercules X‐1 Pulse Profile: Evidence for a Resolved Inner Disk Occultation of the Neutron Star

2000· article· en· W2017667374 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeutron starPulsarOccultationAccretion (finance)Pulse (music)Millisecond pulsarAccretion disc

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ginga and Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) observations have allowed an unprecedented view of the recurrent systematic pulse shape changes associated with the 35-day cycle of Hercules X-1, a phenomenon currently unique among the known accretion-powered pulsars. We present observations of the pulse shape evolution. An explanation for the pulse evolution in terms of a freely precessing neutron star is reviewed and shown to have several major difficulties in explaining the observed pulse evolution pattern. Instead, we propose a phenomenological model for the pulse evolution based upon an occultation of the pulse emitting region by the tilted, inner edge of a precessing accretion disk. The systematic and repeating pulse shape changes require a resolved occultation of the pulse emission region. The observed pulse profile motivates the need for a pulsar beam consisting of a composite coaxial pencil and fan beam but the observed evolution pattern requires the fan beam to be focused around the neutron star and beamed in the antipodal direction. The spectral hardness of the pencil beam component suggests an origin at the magnetic polar cap, with the relatively softer fan beam emission produced by backscattering from within the accretion column, qualitatively consistent with several theoretical models for X-ray emission from the accretion column of an accreting neutron star.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations111
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207