MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773418845 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaaf6b

Future Cosmological Constraints From Fast Radio Bursts

2018· article· en· W2773418845 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedshiftDark energyBaryonEquation of stateIntensity mappingCurvatureCOSMIC cancer databaseConstraint (computer-aided design)Oscillation (cell signaling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider the possible observation of fast radio bursts (FRBs) with planned future radio telescopes, and investigate how well the dispersions and redshifts of these signals might constrain cosmological parameters. We construct mock catalogs of FRB dispersion measure (DM) data and employ Markov Chain Monte Carlo analysis, with which we forecast and compare with existing constraints in the flat ΛCDM model, as well as some popular extensions that include dark energy equation of state and curvature parameters. We find that the scatter in DM observations caused by inhomogeneities in the intergalactic medium (IGM) poses a big challenge to the utility of FRBs as a cosmic probe. Only in the most optimistic case, with a high number of events and low IGM variance, do FRBs aid in improving current constraints. In particular, when FRBs are combined with CMB+BAO+SNe+ H 0 data, we find the biggest improvement comes in the constraint. Also, we find that the dark energy equation of state is poorly constrained, while the constraint on the curvature parameter, Ω k , shows some improvement when combined with current constraints. When FRBs are combined with future baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) data from 21 cm Intensity Mapping, we find little improvement over the constraints from BAOs alone. However, the inclusion of FRBs introduces an additional parameter constraint, , which turns out to be comparable to existing constraints. This suggests that FRBs provide valuable information about the cosmological baryon density in the intermediate redshift universe, independent of high-redshift CMB data.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations108
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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