MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A new technique for timing the double pulsar system

2009· article· en· W2034361668 on OpenAlexaff
P. C. C. Freire, Norbert Wex, M. Krämer, D. R. Lorimer, M. A. McLaughlin, I. H. Stairs, R. Rosen, A. G. Lyne

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsPulsarMagnetosphereAstrophysicsObserver (physics)Gravitational waveRotation (mathematics)Radio frequencyMagnetic fieldQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2004, McLaughlin et al. discovered a phenomenon in the radio emission of PSR J0737−3039B (B) that resembles drifting subpulses. The repeat rate of the subpulses is equal to the spin frequency of PSR J0737−3039A (A); this led to the suggestion that they are caused by incidence upon B's magnetosphere of electromagnetic radiation from A. Here, we describe a geometrical model which predicts the delay of B's subpulses relative to A's radio pulses. We show that measuring these delays is equivalent to tracking A's rotation from the point of view of a hypothetical observer located near B. This has three main astrophysical applications: (i) to determine the sense of rotation of A relative to its orbital plane, (ii) to estimate where in B's magnetosphere the radio subpulses are modulated and (iii) to provide an independent estimate of the mass ratio of A and B. The latter might improve existing tests of gravitational theories using this system.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→