MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2291445857 · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/822/1/37

ORDINARY X-RAYS FROM THREE EXTRAORDINARY MILLISECOND PULSARS: XMM-NEWTON OBSERVATIONS OF PSRs J0337+1715, J0636+5129, AND J0645+5158

2016· article· en· W2291445857 on OpenAlexaff
R. Spiewak, D. L. Kaplan, Anne M. Archibald, Peter A. Gentile, J. W. T. Hessels, D. R. Lorimer, Ryan S. Lynch, M. A. McLaughlin, S. M. Ransom, I. H. Stairs, Kevin Stovall

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillisecond pulsarPulsarPhysicsAstrophysicsWhite dwarfPhotometry (optics)Pulsar planetAstronomyBinary pulsarStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present the first X-ray observations of three recently discovered millisecond pulsars (MSPs) with interesting characteristics: PSR J0337+1715, PSR J0636+5129, and PSR J0645+5158. PSR J0337+1715 is a fast-spinning, bright, and so-far unique MSP in a hierarchical triple system with two white dwarf companions. PSR J0636+5129 is an MSP in a very tight 96-minute orbit with a low-mass, 8 M J companion. PSR J0645+5158 is a nearby, isolated MSP with a very small duty cycle (1%–2%), which has led to its inclusion in high-precision pulsar timing programs. Using data from XMM-Newton, we have analyzed X-ray spectroscopy for these three objects, as well as optical/ultraviolet photometry for PSR J0337+1715. The X-ray data for each are largely consistent with expectations for most MSPs with regards to the ratios of thermal and non-thermal emission. We discuss the implications of these data on the pulsar population, and prospects for future observations of these pulsars.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→