MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097523063 · doi:10.1086/381430

Constraints on the Very High Energy Emission from BL Lacertae Objects

2004· article· en· W2097523063 on OpenAlexaff
D. Horan, H. M. Badran, I. H. Bond, P. J. Boyle, S. M. Bradbury, J. H. Buckley, D. A. Carter‐Lewis, M. Catanese, Ö. Çelik, Wei Cui, M. K. Daniel, M. D’Vali, C. Duke, A. Falcone, D. J. Fegan, S. Fegan, J. P. Finley, L. Fortson, J. A. Gaidos, S. Gammell, K. Gibbs, G. H. Gillanders, J. Grube, J. Hall, T. A. Hall, D. Hanna, A. M. Hillas, J. Holder, A. Jarvis, M. Jordan, G. E. Kenny, M. Kertzman, D. Kieda, J. Kildea, J. Knapp, K. Kosack, H. Krawczynski, F. Krennrich, M. J. Lang, S. Le Bohec, E. Linton, J. Lloyd‐Evans, A. Milovanović, P. Moriarty, D. Müller, T. Nagai, S. J. Nolan, R. A. Ong, R. Pallassini, D. Petry, B. Power‐Mooney, J. Quinn, M. Quinn, K. Ragan, P. Rebillot, P. T. Reynolds, H. J. Rose, M. Schroedter, G. H. Sembroski, S. P. Swordy, A. Syson, V. V. Vassiliev, S. P. Wakely, Gary Walker, T. C. Weekes, J. Zweerink

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsFlux (metallurgy)EgretObservatoryTelescopeAstronomyRedshiftGamma rayBL Lac objectCrab NebulaExtragalactic background lightSynchrotronBlazarGalaxyNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results from observations of 29 BL Lacertae objects, taken with the Whipple Observatory 10 m Gamma-Ray Telescope between 1995 and 2000. The observed objects are mostly at low redshift (z < 0.2) but observations of objects of z up to 0.444 are also reported. Five of the objects are EGRET sources and two are unconfirmed TeV sources. Three of the confirmed sources of extragalactic TeV gamma rays were originally observed as part of this survey and have been reported elsewhere. No significant excesses are detected from any of the other objects observed, on time scales of days, months or years. We report 99.9% confidence level flux upper limits for the objects for each observing season. The flux upper limits are typically 20% of the Crab flux although, for some sources, limits as sensitive as 6% of the Crab flux were derived. The results are consistent with the synchrotron-self-Compton (SSC) model predictions considered in this work.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations58
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207