Beaming as an explanation of the repetition/width relation in FRBs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT It is currently not known if repeating fast radio bursts (FRBs) are fundamentally different from those that have not been seen to repeat. One striking difference between repeaters and apparent non-repeaters in the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment sample is that the once-off events are typically shorter in duration than sources that have been detected two or more times. We offer a simple explanation for this discrepancy based on a selection effect due to beamed emission, in which highly beamed FRBs are less easily observed to repeat, but are abundant enough to detect often as once-off events. The explanation predicts that there is a continuous distribution of burst duration – not a static bimodal one – with a correlation between repetition rate and width. Pulse width and opening angle may be related by relativistic effects in shocks, where short-duration bursts have small solid angles due to a large common Lorentz factor. Alternatively, the relationship could be a geometric effect where narrow beams sweep past the observer more quickly, as with pulsars. Our model has implications for the FRB emission mechanism and energy scale, volumetric event rates, and the application of FRBs to cosmology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".