MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041854675 · doi:10.1086/377070

<i>Chandra</i> Detection of the High Magnetic Field Radio Pulsar J1119-6127in the Supernova Remnant G292.2-0.5

2003· article· en· W2041854675 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsarSupernova remnantPulsar wind nebulaNebulaLuminosityMagnetic fieldRotational energySupernova

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the Chandra Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer detection of the X-ray counterpart of the high magnetic field, ~1600 yr old, 407 ms radio pulsar J1119-6127 associated with the supernova remnant G292.2-0.5. The powerful imaging capability of Chandra also unveiled, for the first time, a faint 3'' × 6'' pulsar wind nebula (PWN) at energies above ~1.2 keV. The X-ray emission from the pulsar and its associated nebula is well described by an absorbed power law model with a photon index Γ = 2.2 . The corresponding 0.5-10 keV unabsorbed X-ray luminosity is (5.5 ) × 10 32 ergs s -1 (at 6 kpc). When compared to two other pulsars with similar spin and magnetic properties, J1119-6127 stands out as being the least efficient at turning rotational kinetic energy into X-ray emission. This study shows that high magnetic field radio pulsars can be significant X-ray emitters, and Chandra is needed to study the emission properties of the pulsars and associated faint PWNs.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations52
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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