MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415655701 · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/826/2/162

THE IMPACT OF SURFACE TEMPERATURE INHOMOGENEITIES ON QUIESCENT NEUTRON STAR RADIUS MEASUREMENTS

2016· article· en· W2415655701 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRADIUSHot spot (computer programming)Neutron starSpectral lineGlobular clusterThermalRange (aeronautics)Stars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Fitting the thermal X-ray spectra of neutron stars (NSs) in quiescent X-ray binaries can constrain the masses and radii of NSs. The effect of undetected hot spots on the spectrum, and thus on the inferred NS mass and radius, has not yet been explored for appropriate atmospheres and spectra. A hot spot would harden the observed spectrum, so that spectral modeling tends to infer radii that are too small. However, a hot spot may also produce detectable pulsations. We simulated the effects of a hot spot on the pulsed fraction and spectrum of the quiescent NSs X5 and X7 in the globular cluster 47 Tucanae, using appropriate spectra and beaming for hydrogen atmosphere models, incorporating special and general relativistic effects, and sampling a range of system angles. We searched for pulsations in archival Chandra HRC-S observations of X5 and X7, placing 90% confidence upper limits on their pulsed fractions below 16%. We use these pulsation limits to constrain the temperature differential of any hot spots, and to then constrain the effects of possible hot spots on the X-ray spectrum and the inferred radius from spectral fitting. We find that hot spots below our pulsation limit could bias the spectroscopically inferred radius downward by up to 28%. For Cen X-4 (which has deeper published pulsation searches), an undetected hot spot could bias its inferred radius downward by up to 10%. Improving constraints on pulsations from quiescent LMXBs may be essential for progress in constraining their radii.

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)0.003
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207