MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2803599992

The Distance of the SNR CTB 109/AXP 1E 2259+586:Is there a real interaction between CTB 109 and adjacent/adjoining clouds?

2007· preprint· en· W2803599992 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenwu Tian, D. A. Leahy

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2007
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsPulsarPhysicsMagnetarSupernova remnantMolecular cloudSpectral lineStarsGalactic planeSupernovaAstronomyEmission spectrum
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We revise the distance estimate to the supernova remnant (SNR) G109.1-1.0 (CTB 109) and its associated anomalous X-ray pulsar (AXP) 1E 2259+586 by re-analyzing both 408 and 1420 MHz continuum images, 21 cm HI absorption/emission spectra and $^{12}$CO emission spectra of CTB 109 and an adjacent compact HII region Sh 152, using the data from the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey. The HI images show that CTB 109 is morphologically located inside a shell in HI emission in the velocity range -61 to -70 km/s. Such a shell is likely blown by a stellar wind. The relation is supported by newly detected HI absorption features between $\sim$ -61 km/s and -66 km/s, which are in the direction of the bright radio continuum emission within the north shell of CTB 109. We therefore give a distance of $\sim$ 6 kpc to CTB 109, which is consistent with the distance of AXP 1E 2259+586 derived by the red clump stars method. The distance of $\sim$ 6 kpc to the SNR/AXP system argues against a SNR/CO cloud interaction and instead favors a SNR/HI cloud interaction. The large distance argues for an anomalously large explosion energy which might be expected by a magnetar (AXP 1E 2259+586) harboring at the center of CTB 109.

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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→