MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133526479 · doi:10.1086/508403

A Survey of 56 Midlatitude EGRET Error Boxes for Radio Pulsars

2006· article· en· W2133526479 on OpenAlexaff
F. Crawford, M. S. Roberts, J. W. T. Hessels, S. M. Ransom, Margaret A. Livingstone, Cindy R. Tam, V. M. Kaspi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulsarEgretAstrophysicsPhysicsLuminosityMillisecond pulsarPopulationAstronomyRadio telescopeGreen Bank TelescopeGalaxyGamma ray

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have conducted a radio pulsar survey of 56 unidentified γ-ray sources from the third EGRET catalog that are at intermediate Galactic latitudes (5° < | b | < 73°). For each source, four interleaved 35 minute pointings were made with the 13 beam, 1400 MHz multibeam receiver on the Parkes 64 m radio telescope. This covered the 95% error box of each source at a limiting sensitivity of ~0.2 mJy to pulsed radio emission for periods P ≳ 10 ms and dispersion measures ≲50 pc cm -3 . Roughly half of the unidentified γ-ray sources at | b | > 5° with no proposed active galactic nucleus counterpart were covered in this survey. We detected nine isolated pulsars and four recycled binary pulsars, with three from each class being new discoveries. Timing observations suggest that only one of the pulsars has a spin-down luminosity that is even marginally consistent with the inferred luminosity of its coincident EGRET source. Our results suggest that population models, which include the Gould Belt as a component, overestimate the number of isolated pulsars among the midlatitude Galactic γ-ray sources, and that it is unlikely that Gould Belt pulsars make up the majority of these sources. However, the possibility of steep pulsar radio spectra and the confusion of terrestrial radio interference with long-period pulsars ( P ≳ 200 ms) having very low dispersion measures (≲10 pc cm -3 , expected for sources at a distance of less than about 1 kpc) prevent us from strongly ruling out this hypothesis. Our results also do not support the hypothesis that millisecond pulsars make up the majority of these sources. Nonpulsar source classes should therefore be further investigated as possible counterparts to the unidentified EGRET sources at intermediate Galactic latitudes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations71
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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