MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761926605 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/721/2/1193

THE EVOLUTION OF PSR J0737–3039B AND A MODEL FOR RELATIVISTIC SPIN PRECESSION

2010· article· en· W2761926605 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPulsarPrecessionFlux (metallurgy)Pulse (music)Beam (structure)Spin (aerodynamics)Millisecond pulsarRelativistic beaming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the evolution of the radio emission from the 2.8 s pulsar of the double pulsar system PSR J0737− 3039A/B. We provide an update on the Burgay et al. analysis by describing the changes in the pulse profile and flux density over five years of observations, culminating in the B pulsar's radio disappearance in 2008 March. Over this time, the flux density decreases by 0.177 mJy yr −1 at the brightest orbital phases and the pulse profile evolves from a single to a double peak, with a separation rate of 2 6 yr −1 . The pulse profile changes are most likely caused by relativistic spin precession but cannot be easily explained with a circular hollow-cone beam as in the model of Clifton & Weisberg. Relativistic spin precession, coupled with an elliptical beam, can model the pulse profile evolution well and the reappearance is expected to happen in ∼2035 with the same part of the beam or in ∼2014 if we assume a symmetric beam shape. This particular beam shape predicts geometrical parameters for the two bright orbital phases which are consistent with and similar to those derived by Breton et al. However, the observed decrease in flux over time and B's eventual disappearance cannot be easily explained by the model and may be due to the changing influence of A on B.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations76
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207