MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3009662317 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa616

Limits on absorption from a 332-MHz survey for fast radio bursts

2020· article· en· W3009662317 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kaustubh Rajwade, M. B. Mickaliger, B. W. Stappers, C. Bassa, R. P. Breton, A. Karastergiou, E. F. Keane

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilScience and Technology Facilities CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Commission
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRadio telescopeAbsorption (acoustics)SupernovaCompton scatteringAstronomyObservatorySkyEjectaScatteringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are bright, extragalactic radio pulses whose origins are still unknown. Until recently, most FRBs have been detected at frequencies greater than 1 GHz with a few exceptions at 800 MHz. The recent discoveries of FRBs at 400 MHz from the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME) telescope have opened up possibilities for new insights about the progenitors while many other low-frequency surveys in the past have failed to find any FRBs. Here, we present results from an FRB survey recently conducted at the Jodrell Bank Observatory at 332 MHz with the 76-m Lovell telescope for a total of 58 d. We did not detect any FRBs in the survey and report a 90${{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ upper limit of 5500 FRBs per day per sky for a Euclidean Universe above a fluence threshold of 46 Jy ms. We discuss the possibility of absorption as the main cause of non-detections in low-frequency (<800 MHz) searches and invoke different absorption models to explain the same. We find that Induced Compton Scattering alone cannot account for absorption of radio emission and that our simulations favour a combination of Induced Compton Scattering and Free-Free Absorption to explain the non-detections. For a free–free absorption scenario, our constraints on the electron density are consistent with those expected in the post-shock region of the ionized ejecta in superluminous supernovae.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→