MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083405175 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/786/2/84

TIMING AND FLUX EVOLUTION OF THE GALACTIC CENTER MAGNETAR SGR J1745–2900

2014· article· en· W2083405175 on OpenAlexaff
V. M. Kaspi, R. F. Archibald, V. Bhalerao, François Dufour, E. V. Gotthelf, Hongjun An, Matteo Bachetti, Andrei M. Beloborodov, Steven E. Boggs, Finn E. Christensen, William W. Craig, Brian W. Grefenstette, Charles J. Hailey, Fiona A. Harrison, J. A. Kennea, C. Kouveliotou, Kristin K. Madsen, Kaya Mori, C. B. Markwardt, Daniel Stern, Julia K. Vogel, William W. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetarGalactic CenterFlux (metallurgy)AstrophysicsAstronomyCenter (category theory)Neutron starGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the X-ray timing and spectral evolution of the Galactic Center magnetar SGR J1745−2900 for the first ∼4 months post-discovery using data obtained with the Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array and Swift observatories. Our timing analysis reveals a large increase in the magnetar spin-down rate by a factor of 2.60 ± 0.07 over our data span. We further show that the change in spin evolution was likely coincident with a bright X-ray burst observed in 2013 June by Swift , and if so, there was no accompanying discontinuity in the frequency. We find that the source 3–10 keV flux has declined monotonically by a factor of ∼2 over an 80 day period post-outburst accompanied by a ∼20% decrease in the source's blackbody temperature, although there is evidence for both flux and kT having leveled off. We argue that the torque variations are likely to be magnetospheric in nature and will dominate over any dynamical signatures of orbital motion around Sgr A * .

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations80
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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