MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555530152 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/15

TYPE IA SUPERNOVAE: COLORS, RATES, AND PROGENITORS

2016· article· en· W2555530152 on OpenAlexaff
E. Heringer, C. J. Pritchet, Jason Kezwer, M. L. Graham, David J. Sand, C. Bildfell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupernovaPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyStar formationLuminosityStarsDegenerate energy levelsCutoffAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The rate of type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) in a galaxy depends not only on stellar mass, but also on star formation history (SFH). Here we show that two simple observational quantities (g − r or u − r host galaxy color, and r-band luminosity), coupled with an assumed delay time distribution (DTD) (the rate of SNe Ia as a function of time for an instantaneous burst of star formation), are sufficient to accurately determine a galaxy’s SN Ia rate, with very little sensitivity to the precise details of the SFH. Using this result, we compare observed and predicted color distributions of SN Ia hosts for the MENeaCS cluster supernova survey, and for the SDSS Stripe 82 supernova survey. The observations are consistent with a continuous DTD, without any cutoff. For old progenitor systems, the power-law slope for the DTD is found to be . This result favors the double degenerate scenario for SN Ia, though other interpretations are possible. We find that the late-time slopes of the DTD are different at the 1σ level for low and high stretch supernova, which suggest a single degenerate (SD) scenario for the latter. However, due to ambiguity in the current models’ DTD predictions, SD progenitors can neither be confirmed as causing high stretch supernovae nor ruled out from contributing to the overall sample.

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)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207