MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952644610 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.123517

Prospects of strongly lensed repeating fast radio bursts: Complementary constraints on dark energy evolution

2019· article· en· W2952644610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bin Liu, Zhengxiang Li, He Gao, Zong‐Hong Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDark energyPhysicsCosmic microwave backgroundAstrophysicsHubble's lawPopulationCosmologyAstronomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are highly dispersed and probably extragalactic radio flashes with millisecond duration. Recently, the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (using the CHIME/FRB instrument) has reported detections of 13 FRBs during a pre-commissioning phase. It is more exciting that one of the 13 FRBs is a second source of repeaters which suggests that CHIME/FRB and other wide-field sensitive radio telescopes will find a substantial population of repeating FRBs. We have proposed strongly lensed repeating FRBs as a precision cosmological probe, e.g., constraining the Hubble constant and model independently estimating the cosmic curvature. Here, we study complementary constraints on the equation of state of dark energy from strongly lensed FRBs to currently available popular probes. It is found that, in the framework of Chevalier-Polarski-Linder parametrization, adding time delay measurement of 30 strongly lensed FRB systems to cosmic microwave background radiation and type Ia supernovae can improve the dark energy figure of merit by a factor 2. In the precision cosmology era, this improvement is of great significance for studying the nature of dark energy.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.418
Teacher spread0.404 · 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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207