MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optical observations of SAX J1808.4−3658 during quiescence

2008· article· en· W2049353534 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher J. Deloye, C. O. Heinke, Ronald E. Taam, P. G. Jonker

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPulsarNeutron starAstrophysicsLuminosityMillisecond pulsarFlux (metallurgy)Orbital periodModulation (music)AmplitudeBinary numberAstronomyMillisecondStarsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We observed the accreting millisecond pulsar SAX J1808.4−3658 with Gemini-South in g′ and i′ bands, nearly simultaneous with XMM–Newton observations. A clear periodic flux modulation on the system's orbital period is present, consistent with the varying aspect of the donor star's heated face. We model the contributions of a disc and donor star to these optical bands. To produce the observed modulation amplitudes, we conclude that the donor must be irradiated by an external flux two orders of magnitude greater than provided by the measured X-ray luminosity. A possible explanation for this irradiation is that the radio pulsar mechanism becomes active during the quiescent state as suggested by Burderi et al., with relativistic particles heating the donor's day side face. Our modelling constrains the binary inclination to be 36°–67°. We obtain estimates for the pulsar mass of >2.2 M⊙ (although this limit is sensitive to the source's distance), consistent with the accelerated neutron star cooling in this system indicated by X-ray observations. We also estimate the donor mass to be 0.07–0.11 M⊙, providing further indications that the system underwent non-standard binary evolution to reach its current state.

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 score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations56
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207