MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768983022 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2941

Chandra Observation of PWN G16.73+0.08 in SNR G16.7+0.1

2017· article· es· W2768983022 on OpenAlexaff
Hsiang‐Kuang Chang, Shang-Ting Chung, C. Y. Yang, W. W. Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSupernova remnantAstrophysicsPulsar wind nebulaNebulaPulsarObservatoryAstronomySupernovaStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present X-ray observations of pulsar wind nebula (PWN) G16.73+0.08/supernova remnant (SNR) G16.7+0.1 using archival data of Chandra ACIS. The X-ray emission peak location of this PWN is found to be offset by 24 arcsec from the centre of the 1.4-GHz emission of this nebula. The X-ray nebula is elongated in the direction from the X-ray peak to the 1.4-GHz emission centre. This offset suggests that G16.73+0.08 is an evolved PWN interacting with the SNR reverse shock. We identify a point source, CXO J182058.16 − 142001.5, near the location of the X-ray peak. The spectrum of the X-ray nebula can be described by an absorbed power law of photon index |$0.98^{+0.79}_{-0.71}$| and hydrogen column density |$N_{\rm H}=4.99^{+2.75}_{-2.28}\times 10^{22}$| cm−2. CXO J182058.16 − 142001.5 is likely a pulsar. We estimate its spin-down power to be about 2.6 × 1036 erg s−1. Assuming its age at 3000 and 10 000 yr, its dipole magnetic field strength at the polar surface is estimated to be about 4.2 × 1013 and 1.3 × 1013 G, respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207