MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517317009 · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/831/1/89

A NEW γ-RAY LOUD, ECLIPSING LOW-MASS X-RAY BINARY

2016· article· en· W2517317009 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLight curveTelescopePhotometry (optics)Binary numberEclipseBinary starLuminosityNeutron starAccretion (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We report the discovery of an eclipsing low-mass X-ray binary at the center of the 3FGL error ellipse of the unassociated Fermi /Large Area Telescope γ -ray source 3FGL J0427.9–6704. Photometry from OGLE and the SMARTS 1.3 m telescope and spectroscopy from the SOAR telescope have allowed us to classify the system as an eclipsing low-mass X-ray binary ( P = 8.8 hr) with a main-sequence donor and a neutron-star accretor. Broad double-peaked H and He emission lines suggest the ongoing presence of an accretion disk. Remarkably, the system shows separate sets of absorption lines associated with the accretion disk and the secondary, and we use their radial velocities to find evidence for a massive (∼1.8–1.9 M ⊙ ) neutron-star primary. In addition to a total X-ray eclipse with a duration of ∼2200 s observed with NuSTAR , the X-ray light curve also shows properties similar to those observed among known transitional millisecond pulsars: short-term variability, a hard power-law spectrum ( ), and a comparable 0.5–10 keV luminosity ( erg s −1 ). We find tentative evidence for a partial ( ) γ -ray eclipse at the same phase as the X-ray eclipse, suggesting the γ -ray emission may not be confined to the immediate region of the compact object. The favorable inclination of this binary is promising for future efforts to determine the origin of γ -rays among accreting neutron stars.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations47
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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