MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A superburst candidate in EXO 1745−248 as a challenge to thermonuclear ignition models

2012· article· en· W2160994647 on OpenAlexafffund
D. Altamirano, L. Keek, A. Cumming, G. R. Sivakoff, C. O. Heinke, R. Wijnands, N. Degenaar, J. Homan, D. Pooley

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University
FundersRIKENNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencySmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSpace Telescope Science InstituteSmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsFlareThermonuclear fusionNeutron starContext (archaeology)Accretion (finance)Globular clusterIgnition systemLight curveSupernovaAstronomyNuclear physicsPlasmaStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on Chandra, Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE), Swift/Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) and MAXI observations of an X-ray flare of ∼1 d and subsequent outburst of a transient X-ray source observed in 2011 October–November in the globular cluster Terzan 5. We show that the source is the same as the transient that was active in 2000, i.e. the neutron star low-mass X-ray binary EXO 1745−248. For the X-ray flare we estimate a 6–11 h exponential decay time and a radiated energy of 2–9 × 1042 erg. These properties, together with strong evidence of decreasing blackbody temperature during the flare decay, are fully consistent with what is expected for a thermonuclear superburst. We use the most recent superburst models and estimate an ignition column depth of ≈1012 g cm−2 and an energy release between 0.1 × 1018 and 2 × 1018 erg g−1, also consistent with expected superburst values. We conclude therefore that the flare was most probably a superburst. We discuss our results in the context of theoretical models and find that even when assuming a few days of low-level accretion before the superburst onset (which is more than what is suggested by the data), the observations of this superburst are very challenging for current superburst ignition models.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207