MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786189232 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaac2a

Discovery of Three New Millisecond Pulsars in Terzan 5

2018· article· en· W2786189232 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillisecond pulsarGlobular clusterPulsarPopulationPulsar planetTelescopeX-ray pulsarCluster (spacecraft)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report on the discovery of three new millisecond pulsars (MSPs; namely J1748−2446aj, J1748−2446ak, and J1748−2446al) in the inner regions of the dense stellar system Terzan 5. These pulsars have been discovered thanks to a method, alternative to the classical search routines, that exploited the large set of archival observations of Terzan 5 acquired with the Green Bank Telescope over five years (from 2010 to 2015). This technique allowed the analysis of stacked power spectra obtained by combining ∼206 hr of observation. J1748−2446aj has a spin period of ∼2.96 ms, J1748−2446ak of ∼1.89 ms (thus it is the fourth fastest pulsar in the cluster) and J1748−2446al of ∼5.95 ms. All three MSPs are isolated, and currently we have timing solutions only for J1748−2446aj and J1748−2446ak. For these two systems, we evaluated the contribution to the measured spin-down rate of the acceleration due to the cluster potential field, thus estimating the intrinsic spin-down rates, which are in agreement with those typically measured for MSPs in globular clusters (GCs). Our results increase the number of pulsars known in Terzan 5 to 37, which now hosts 25% of the entire pulsar population identified, so far, in GCs.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations49
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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