NEUTRON STAR MASS–RADIUS CONSTRAINTS USING EVOLUTIONARY OPTIMIZATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The equation of state of cold supra-nuclear-density matter, such as in neutron stars, is an open question in astrophysics. A promising method for constraining the neutron star equation of state is modeling pulse profiles of thermonuclear X-ray burst oscillations from hot spots on accreting neutron stars. The pulse profiles, constructed using spherical and oblate neutron star models, are comparable to what would be observed by a next-generation X-ray timing instrument like ASTROSAT, NICER, or a mission similar to LOFT. In this paper, we showcase the use of an evolutionary optimization algorithm to fit pulse profiles to determine the best-fit masses and radii. By fitting synthetic data, we assess how well the optimization algorithm can recover the input parameters. Multiple Poisson realizations of the synthetic pulse profiles, constructed with 1.6 million counts and no background, were fitted with the Ferret algorithm to analyze both statistical and degeneracy-related uncertainty and to explore how the goodness of fit depends on the input parameters. For the regions of parameter space sampled by our tests, the best-determined parameter is the projected velocity of the spot along the observer’s line of sight, with an accuracy of ≤3% compared to the true value and with ≤5% statistical uncertainty. The next best determined are the mass and radius; for a neutron star with a spin frequency of 600 Hz, the best-fit mass and radius are accurate to ≤5%, with respective uncertainties of ≤7% and ≤10%. The accuracy and precision depend on the observer inclination and spot colatitude, with values of ∼1% achievable in mass and radius if both the inclination and colatitude are ≳60°.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".