The electromagnetic model of gamma-ray bursts
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I describe electromagnetic model of gamma ray bursts and contrast its main properties and predictions with hydrodynamic fireball model and its magnetohydrodynamical extension. The electromagnetic model assumes that rotational energy of a relativistic, stellar-mass central source (black-hole--accretion disk system or fast rotating neutron star) is converted into magnetic energy through unipolar dynamo mechanism, propagated to large distances in a form of relativistic, subsonic, Poynting flux-dominated wind and is dissipated directly into emitting particles through current-driven instabilities. Thus, there is no conversion back and forth between internal and bulk energies as in the case of fireball model. Collimating effects of magnetic hoop stresses lead to strongly non-spherical expansion and formation of jets. Long and short GRBs may develop in a qualitatively similar way, except that in case of long bursts ejecta expansion has a relatively short, non-relativistic, strongly dissipative stage inside the star. Electromagnetic and fireball models (as well as strongly and weakly magnetized fireballs) lead to different early afterglow dynamics, before deceleration time. Finally, I discuss the models in view of latest observational data in the Swift era.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it