MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055339299 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/736/2/138

THE 2006–2007 ACTIVE PHASE OF ANOMALOUS X-RAY PULSAR 4U 0142+61: RADIATIVE AND TIMING CHANGES, BURSTS, AND BURST SPECTRAL FEATURES

2011· article· en· W2055339299 on OpenAlexaff
F. P. Gavriil, Rim Dib, V. M. Kaspi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetarPulsarAstrophysicsPhysicsGlitchNeutron starBlack-body radiationPhase (matter)AmplitudeAstronomyFlux (metallurgy)Light curveRadiationDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After at least six years of quiescence, anomalous X-ray pulsar (AXP) 4U 0142+61 entered an active phase in 2006 March that lasted several months and included six X-ray bursts as well as many changes in the persistent X-ray emission. The bursts, the first seen from this AXP in >11 yr of Rossi X-Ray Timing Explorer monitoring, all occurred in the interval between 2006 April 6 and 2007 February 7. The burst durations ranged from (0.4–1.8) × 10 3 s. The first five burst spectra are well modeled by blackbodies, with temperatures kT ∼ 2–9 keV. However, the sixth burst had a complicated spectrum that is well characterized by a blackbody plus two emission features whose amplitude varied throughout the burst. The most prominent feature was at 14.0 keV. Upon entry into the active phase, the pulsar showed a significant change in pulse morphology and a likely timing glitch. The glitch had a total frequency jump of (1.9 ± 0.4) × 10 −7 Hz, which recovered with a decay time of 17 ± 2 days by more than the initial jump, implying a net spin-down of the pulsar. Within the framework of the magnetar model, the net spin-down of the star could be explained by regions of the superfluid that rotate slower than the rest. The bursts, flux enhancements, and pulse morphology changes can be explained as arising from crustal deformations due to stresses imposed by the highly twisted internal magnetic field. However, unlike other AXP outbursts, we cannot account for a major twist being implanted in the magnetosphere.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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