MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120919950 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/788/2/155

NuSTAR DISCOVERY OF A YOUNG, ENERGETIC PULSAR ASSOCIATED WITH THE LUMINOUS GAMMA-RAY SOURCE HESS J1640–465

2014· article· en· W2120919950 on OpenAlexaff
E. V. Gotthelf, John A. Tomsick, J. P. Halpern, Joseph Gelfand, Fiona A. Harrison, Steven E. Boggs, Finn E. Christensen, William W. Craig, J. Charles Hailey, V. M. Kaspi, Daniel Stern, W. W. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPulsarAstrophysicsGamma rayAstronomyGamma-ray astronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the discovery of a 206 ms pulsar associated with the TeV γ-ray source HESS J1640–465 using the Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (NuSTAR) X-ray observatory. PSR J1640–4631 lies within the shell-type supernova remnant (SNR) G338.3–0.0, and coincides with an X-ray point source and putative pulsar wind nebula (PWN) previously identified in XMM-Newton and Chandra images. It is spinning down rapidly with period derivative Ṗ = 9.758(44) × 10^(–13), yielding a spin-down luminosity Ė = 4.4 × 10^(36) erg s^(–1), characteristic age τ_c ≡ P/2Ṗ = 3350 yr, and surface dipole magnetic field strength B_s = 1.4 × 10^(13) G. For the measured distance of 12 kpc to G338.3–0.0, the 0.2-10 TeV luminosity of HESS J1640–465 is 6% of the pulsar's present Ė. The Fermi source 1FHL J1640.5–4634 is marginally coincident with PSR J1640–4631, but we find no γ-ray pulsations in a search using five years of Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT) data. The pulsar energetics support an evolutionary PWN model for the broadband spectrum of HESS J1640–465, provided that the pulsar's braking index is n ≈ 2, and that its initial spin period was P_0 ~ 15 ms.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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