MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2065920880 · doi:10.1086/423922

The Effect of Neutron Star Gravitational Binding Energy on Gravitational Radiation–driven Mass‐Transfer Binaries

2004· article· en· W2065920880 on OpenAlexaff
E. Alécian, Sharon M. Morsink

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsNeutron starGravitational redshiftAstrophysicsBaryonGravitational energyRedshiftGravitational binding energyGravitational waveAngular momentumAstronomyClassical mechanicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a relativistic model of a neutron star, the star's mass is less than the mass of the individual component baryons, because the star's negative binding energy makes a contribution to the star's total energy and its mass. A consequence of this relativistic mass deficit is that a neutron star that is accreting matter increases its mass at a rate that is slower than the mass of a baryon times the rate that baryons are accreted. This difference in the rate of change of the masses has a simple relation with the star's gravitational redshift. We show that this effect has the potential to be observed in binaries where the mass transfer is driven by angular momentum losses from the gravitational radiation emitted by the binary motion, if the physics of the donor star is understood well enough.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→