MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2971498104 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.068302

Reply to “Comment on ‘Understanding the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>γ</mml:mi></mml:math>-ray emission from the globular cluster 47 Tuc: Evidence for dark matter?”’

2019· article· en· W2971498104 on OpenAlexaff
A. M. Brown, Thomas Lacroix, Sheridan Lloyd, Céline Bœhm, P. M. Chadwick

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesEuropean CommissionScience and Technology Facilities CouncilUniversité de MontpellierCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsGlobular clusterAstrophysicsPhysicsCluster (spacecraft)Fermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeMillisecond pulsarBlack hole (networking)Spectral lineAstronomyPulsarComputer scienceStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analyzing nine years of Fermi-LAT observations, we recently studied the spectral properties of the prominent globular cluster [Phys. Rev. 98, 041301 (2018)]. In particular, we investigated several models to explain the observed gamma-ray emission, ranging from millisecond pulsars (MSPs) to dark matter (DM), with the motivation for the latter model driven by recent evidence that 47 Tuc harbors an intermediate-mass black hole [B. Kiziltan et al., Nature (London) 542, 203 (2017)]. This investigation found evidence that the observed gamma-ray emission from 47 Tuc is due to two source populations of MSPs and DM. In preceding Comment [Phys. Rev. D 100, 068301 (2019)], Bartels and Edwards comment that this evidence is an artifact of the MSP spectra used in our paper. Here, we reply to this comment and argue that (i) Bartels and Edwards do not give due consideration to a very important implication of their result and (ii) there is tension between our MSP fit and their MSP fit when taking uncertainties into consideration. As such, we still conclude there is evidence for a DM component which motivates a deeper radio study of the prominent globular cluster 47 Tuc.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0530.055
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.020

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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