MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2098446021 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/766/1/49

CHARACTERIZING MAGNETIZED TURBULENCE IN M51

2013· article· en· W2098446021 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Houde, Andrew Fletcher, R. Beck, R. H. Hildebrand, John E. Vaillancourt, J. M. Stil

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsTurbulenceFaraday effectAnisotropyMagnetic fieldAstrophysicsOpticsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use previously published high-resolution synchrotron polarization data to perform an angular dispersion analysis with the aim of characterizing magnetized turbulence in M51. We first analyze three distinct regions (the center of the galaxy, and the northwest and southwest spiral arms) and can clearly discern the turbulent correlation length scale from the width of the magnetized turbulent correlation function for two regions and detect the imprint of anisotropy in the turbulence for all three. Furthermore, analyzing the galaxy as a whole allows us to determine a two-dimensional Gaussian model for the magnetized turbulence in M51. We measure the turbulent correlation scales parallel and perpendicular to the local mean magnetic field to be, respectively, δ || = 98 ± 5 pc and δ ⊥ = 54 ± 3 pc, while the turbulent-to-ordered magnetic field strength ratio is found to be B t / B 0 = 1.01 ± 0.04. These results are consistent with those of Fletcher et al., who performed a Faraday rotation dispersion analysis of the same data, and our detection of anisotropy is consistent with current magnetized turbulence theories.

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)0.001
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→