MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169498546 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2025

The variability of the Crab nebula in radio: no radio counterpart to gamma-ray flares

2014· article· en· W2169498546 on OpenAlexaff
M. F. Bietenholz, Yajie Yuan, R. Buehler, A. P. Lobanov, R. D. Blandford

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCrab NebulaAstrophysicsNebulaJanskyFlareBrightnessAstronomyGamma rayEmission nebulaLuminosityStarsRadio galaxyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present new Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) radio images of the Crab nebula at 5.5 GHz, taken at two epochs separated by 6 d about 2 months after a gamma-ray flare in 2012 July. We find no significant change in the Crab's radio emission localized to a region of <2 light-months in radius, either over the 6-d interval between our present observations or between the present observations and ones from 2001. Any radio counterpart to the flare has a radio luminosity of ≲2 × 10−4 times that of the nebula. Comparing our images to one from 2001, we do however find changes in radio brightness, up to 10 per cent in amplitude, which occur on decade time-scales throughout the nebula. The morphology of the changes is complex suggesting both filamentary and knotty structures. The variability is stronger, and the time-scales likely somewhat shorter, nearer the centre of the nebula. We further find that even with the excellent u − v coverage and signal to noise of the VLA, deconvolution errors are much larger than the noise, being up to 1.2 per cent of peak brightness of the nebula in this particular case.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207