MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088832460 · doi:10.1086/430632

Two Pulsar Wind Nebulae:<i>Chandra/XMM‐Newton</i>Imaging of GeV J1417−6100

2005· article· en· W2088832460 on OpenAlexaff
C.‐Y. Ng, M. S. Roberts, Roger W. Romani

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPulsarPhysicsAstrophysicsAcisNebulaPulsar wind nebulaAstronomyPoint sourcePulsar planetBinary pulsarMillisecond pulsarStarsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on Chandra ACIS and XMM-Newton MOS/PN imaging observations of two pulsar wind nebulae (K3/PSR J1420-6048 and G313.3+0.1=`the rabbit') associated with the Galactic unidentified gamma-ray source GeV J1417-6100. With the excellent ACIS imaging, the very energetic pulsar PSR J1420-6048 is separated from its surrounding nebula. This nebula has surprisingly little compact structure, although a faint arc is seen near the pulsar. Similarly, two point sources are resolved in the rabbit nebula. The large XMM-Newton collecting area provides useful spectral constraints on the rabbit and the associated point sources. Based on spectra and X-ray morphology, we identify one point source as a plausible pulsar counterpart. Large backgrounds and low source counts limited pulse search sensitivities, but we report pulse upper limits and a candidate 108ms period for the rabbit pulsar based on the XMM-Newton data and an ACIS CC observation. Comparison of the X-ray images with high resolution ATCA radio maps shows that the non-thermal X-ray emission corresponds well with the radio structure.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations53
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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