MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159916197 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/712/2/1157

FARADAY ROTATION OF THE SUPERNOVA REMNANT G296.5+10.0: EVIDENCE FOR A MAGNETIZED PROGENITOR WIND

2010· article· en· W2159916197 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupernova remnantFaraday effectMagnetic fieldRotation (mathematics)SupergiantSupernovaInterstellar mediumStellar rotation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present spectropolarimetric radio images of the supernova remnant (SNR) G296.5+10.0 at frequencies near 1.4 GHz, observed with the Australia Telescope Compact Array. By applying rotation measure (RM) synthesis to the data, a pixel-by-pixel map of Faraday rotation has been produced for the entire remnant. We find G296.5+10.0 to have a highly ordered RM structure, with mainly positive RMs (mean RM of +28 rad m-2) on the eastern side and negative RMs (mean RM of -14 rad m-2) on the western side, indicating a magnetic field which is directed away from us on one side and toward us on the other. We consider several possible mechanisms for creating the observed RM pattern. Neither Faraday rotation in foreground interstellar gas nor in a homogeneous ambient medium swept up by the SNR shell can easily explain the magnitude and sign of the observed RM pattern. Instead, we propose that the observed RMs are the imprint of an azimuthal magnetic field in the stellar wind of the progenitor star. Specifically, we calculate that a swept-up magnetized wind from a red supergiant can produce RMs of the observed magnitude, while the azimuthal pattern of the magnetic field at large distances from the star naturally produces the anti-symmetric RM pattern observed. Expansion into such a wind can possibly also account for the striking bilateral symmetry of the SNR's radio and X-ray morphologies. © 2010. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved..

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 score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations48
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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