MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026772322 · doi:10.1086/507125

<i>Chandra</i>and<i>XMM‐Newton</i>Observations of the Vela‐like Pulsar B1046−58

2006· article· en· W2026772322 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsarPulsar wind nebulaLuminosityOutflowSupernova remnantEquipartition theoremNebula

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results from Chandra and XMM-Newton observations of the radio pulsar B1046-58. A high-resolution spatial analysis reveals an asymmetric pulsar wind nebula (PWN), ~6'' × 11'' in size. The combined emission from the pulsar and its PWN is faint, with a best-fit power-law photon index of Γ = 1.7 and unabsorbed luminosity of ~10 32 ergs s -1 in the 0.5-10.0 keV range (assuming a distance of 2.7 kpc). A spatially resolved imaging analysis suggests the presence of softer emission from the pulsar. No pulsations are detected from PSR B1046-58; assuming a worst-case sinusoidal pulse profile, we derive a 3 σ upper limit for the pulsed fraction in the 0.5-10.0 keV range of 53%. Extended PWN emission is seen within 2'' of the pulsar; the additional structures are highly asymmetric and extend predominantly to the southeast. We discuss the emission from the PWN as resulting from material downstream of the wind termination shock, as outflow from the pulsar, or as structures confined by a high space velocity. The first two interpretations imply equipartition fields in the observed structures of ≳40-100 μG, while the latter case implies a velocity for the pulsar of ≳190 n km s -1 (where n 0 is the ambient number density in units of cm -3 ). No emission from an associated supernova remnant is detected.

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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207