MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2335792396 · doi:10.1142/9789813226609_0435

Quark-nova compact remnants: Observational signatures in astronomical data and implications to compact stars

2017· preprint· en· W2335792396 on OpenAlexaff
Rachid Ouyed, D. A. Leahy, Nico Koning, Zachary Shand

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetarQuark starAstrophysicsAccretion (finance)Neutron starAstronomyDebris diskStrange matterStarsPlanetary system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quark-novae leave behind quark stars with a surrounding metal-rich fall-back (ring-like) material. These compact remnants have high magnetic fields and are misconstrued as magnetars; however, several observational features allow us to distinguish a quark star (left behind by a quark-nova) from a neutron star with high magnetic field. In our model, bursting activity is expected from intermittent accretion events from the surrounding fall-back debris leading to X-ray bursts (in the case of a Keplerian ring) or gamma ray bursts (in the case of a co-rotating shell). The details of the spectra are described by a constant background X-ray luminosity from the expulsion of magnetic flux tubes which will be temporarily buried by bursting events caused by accretion of material onto the quark star surface. These accretion events emit high energy photons and heat up the quark star and surrounding debris leading to hot spots which may be observable as distinct blackbodies. Additionally, we explain observed spectral line features as atomic lines from r-process material and explain an observed anti-glitch in an AXP as the transfer of angular momentum from a surrounding Keplerian disk to the quark star.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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