MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113071737 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/785/1/l16

DEEP BROADBAND OBSERVATIONS OF THE DISTANT GAMMA-RAY BLAZAR PKS 1424+240

2014· article· en· W2113071737 on OpenAlexaff
S. Archambault, T. Aune, B. Behera, M. Beilicke, W. Benbow, K. Berger, R. Bird, J. Biteau, V. Bugaev, K. Byrum, J. V Cardenzana, M. Cerruti, X. Chen, L. Ciupik, M. P. Connolly, Wei Cui, J. Dumm, M. Errando, A. Falcone, S. Federici, Q. Feng, J. P. Finley, Henrike Fleischhack, L. Fortson, A. Furniss, N. Galante, G. H. Gillanders, S. Griffin, S. Griffiths, J. Grube, G. Gyuk, D. Hanna, J. Holder, G. Hughes, T. B. Humensky, C. A. Johnson, P. Kaaret, M. Kertzman, Y. Khassen, D. Kieda, H. Krawczynski, F. Krennrich, S. Kumar, M. J. Lang, A. S Madhavan, G. Maier, A. McCann, K. Meagher, P. Moriarty, R. Mukherjee, D. Nieto, A. O’Faoláin de Bhróithe, R. A. Ong, A. N. Otte, N. Park, M. Pohl, A. Popkow, H. Prokoph, J. Quinn, K. Ragan, Jean-François Rajotte, L. C. Reyes, P. T. Reynolds, G. T. Richards, E. Roache, G. H. Sembroski, K. Shahinyan, D. Staszak, I. Telezhinsky, J. V. Tucci, J. Tyler, A. Varlotta, V. V. Vassiliev, S. Vincent, S. P. Wakely, A. J. Weinstein, R. Welsing, A. Wilhelm, D. A. Williams, M. Ackermann, M. Ajello, A. Albert, L. Baldini, D. Bastieri, R. Bellazzini, E. Bissaldi, J. Bregeon, R. Buehler, S. Buson, G. A. Caliandro, R. A. Cameron, P. A. Caraveo, E. Cavazzuti, E. Charles, J. Chiang, S. Ciprini, R. Claus, S. Cutini, F. D’Ammando, A. De Angelis, C. D. Dermer, S. W. Digel, L. Di Venere, P. S. Drell, C. Favuzzi, A. Franckowiak, P. Fusco, F. Gargano, D. Gasparrini, N. Giglietto, F. Giordano, M. Giroletti, I. A. Grenier, S. Guiriec, T. Jogler, M. Kuss, S. Larsson, L. Latronico, F. Longo, F. Loparco, P. Lubrano, G. M. Madejski, M. Mayer, M. N. Mazziotta, P. F. Michelson, Tsunefumi Mizuno, M. E. Monzani, A. Morselli, S. Murgia, E. Nuss, T. Ohsugi, J. F. Ormes, D. Paneque, J. S. Perkins, F. Piron, G. Pivato, S. Rainò, M. Razzano, A. Reimer, O. Reimer, S. Ritz, M. Schaal, C. Sgró, E. J. Siskind, P. Spinelli, H. Takahashi, L. Tibaldo, M. Tinivella, E. Troja, G. Vianello, M. W. Werner, M. Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlazarPhysicsAstrophysicsExtragalactic background lightFlux (metallurgy)Fermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeRedshiftLight curveGamma rayTelescopePhotonAstronomySpectral energy distributionGalaxyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present deep VERITAS observations of the blazar PKS 1424+240, along with contemporaneous Fermi Large Area Telescope, Swift X-ray Telescope, and Swift UV Optical Telescope data between 2009 February 19 and 2013 June 8. This blazar resides at a redshift of z >= 0.6035, displaying a significantly attenuated gamma-ray flux above 100 GeV due to photon absorption via pair-production with the extragalactic background light. We present more than 100 hr of VERITAS observations over three years, a multiwavelength light curve, and the contemporaneous spectral energy distributions. The source shows a higher flux of (2.1 +/- 0.3) x 10(-7) photons m(-2) s(-1) above 120 GeV in 2009 and 2011 as compared to the flux measured in 2013, corresponding to (1.02 +/- 0.08) x 10-7 photons m(-2) s(-1) above 120 GeV. The measured differential very high energy (VHE; E >= 100 GeV) spectral indices are Gamma = 3.8 +/- 0.3, 4.3 +/- 0.6 and 4.5 +/- 0.2 in 2009, 2011, and 2013, respectively. No significant spectral change across the observation epochs is detected. We find no evidence for variability at gamma-ray opacities of greater than tau = 2, where it is postulated that any variability would be small and occur on timescales longer than a year if hadronic cosmic-ray interactions with extragalactic photon fields provide a secondary VHE photon flux. The data cannot rule out such variability due to low statistics.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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