MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044429988 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/750/1/l2

STRONG EVOLUTION OF X-RAY ABSORPTION IN THE TYPE IIn SUPERNOVA SN 2010jl

2012· article· en· W2044429988 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupernovaSpectral lineAbsorption (acoustics)Absorption spectroscopyLine (geometry)Spectroscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report two epochs of Chandra -ACIS X-ray imaging spectroscopy of the nearby bright Type IIn supernova SN 2010jl, taken around two months and then a year after the explosion. The majority of the X-ray emission in both spectra is characterized by a high temperature (≳ 10 keV) and is likely to be from the forward shocked region resulting from circumstellar interaction. The absorption column density in the first spectrum is high (∼10 24 cm −2 ), more than three orders of magnitude higher than the Galactic absorption column, and we attribute it to absorption by circumstellar matter. In the second epoch observation, the column density has decreased by a factor of three, as expected for shock propagation in the circumstellar medium. The unabsorbed 0.2–10 keV luminosity at both epochs is ∼7 × 10 41 erg s −1 . The 6.4 keV Fe line clearly present in the first spectrum is not detected in the second spectrum. The strength of the fluorescent line is roughly that expected for the column density of circumstellar gas, provided the Fe is not highly ionized. There is also evidence for an absorbed power-law component in both spectra, which we attribute to a background ultraluminous X-ray source.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations57
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207