MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085892310 · doi:10.1086/342175

The Broadband Afterglow of GRB 980329

2002· article· en· W2085892310 on OpenAlexaff
S. A. Yost, D. A. Frail, Fiona A. Harrison, R. Sari, D. Reichart, J. S. Bloom, S. R. Kulkarni, G. H. Moriarty‐Schieven, S. G. Djorgovski, P. A. Price, Robert W. Goodrich, James Larkin, Fabian Walter, D. S. Shepherd, D. B. Fox, G. B. Taylor, E. Berger, T. J. Galama

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAfterglowGamma-ray burstPhysicsEjectaAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyAstronomyBroadbandLight curveCollimated lightSupernovaOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present radio observations of the afterglow of the bright γ-ray burst GRB 980329 made between 1 month and several years after the burst, a reanalysis of previously published submillimeter data, and late-time optical and near-infrared (NIR) observations of the host galaxy. From the absence of a spectral break in the optical/NIR colors of the host galaxy, we exclude the earlier suggestion that GRB 980329 lies at a redshift of z ≳ 5. We combine our data with the numerous multiwavelength observations of the early afterglow, fit a comprehensive afterglow model to the entire broadband data set, and derive fundamental physical parameters of the blast wave and its host environment. Models for which the ejecta expand isotropically require both a high circumburst density and extreme radiative losses from the shock. No low-density model ( n ≪ 10 cm -3 ) fits the data. A burst with a total energy of ~10 51 ergs, with the ejecta narrowly collimated to an opening angle of a few degrees, driven into a surrounding medium with density of ~20 cm -3 , provides a satisfactory fit to the light curves over a range of redshifts.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations49
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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