MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087495064 · doi:10.1086/432526

Discovery of Three Wide‐Orbit Binary Pulsars: Implications for Binary Evolution and Equivalence Principles

2005· article· en· W2087495064 on OpenAlexaff
I. H. Stairs, A. J. Faulkner, A. G. Lyne, M. Krämer, D. R. Lorimer, M. A. McLaughlin, R. N. Manchester, G. Hobbs, F. Camilo, Andrea Possenti, M. Burgay, N. D’Amico, P. C. C. Freire, P. C. Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPulsarWhite dwarfAstrophysicsMillisecond pulsarAstronomyBinary numberBinary pulsarTheoretical physicsOrbital elementsStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the discovery of three binary millisecond pulsars during the Parkes Multibeam Pulsar Survey of the Galactic plane. The objects are highly recycled and are in orbits of many tens of days about low-mass white dwarf companions. The eccentricity of one object, PSR J1853+1303, is more than an order of magnitude lower than predicted by the theory of convective fluctuations during tidal circularization. We demonstrate that under the assumption that the systems are randomly oriented, current theoretical models of the core-mass-orbital-period relation for the progenitors of these systems likely overestimate the white dwarf masses, strengthening previous concerns about the match of these models to the data. The new objects allow us to update the limits on the violation of relativistic equivalence principles to 95% confidence upper limits of 5.6 × 10 -3 for the strong equivalence principle parameter |Δ| and 4.0 × 10 -20 for the Lorentz-invariance/momentum-conservation parameter | 3 |.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations106
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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