MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097975658

The NANOGrav Nine-year Data Set: Excess Noise in Millisecond Pulsar Arrival Times

2017· article· en· W3097975658 on OpenAlexaff
Michael T. Lam, J. M. Cordes, Shami Chatterjee, Zaven Arzoumanian, Kathryn Crowter, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Justin A. Ellis, R. D. Ferdman, Emmanuel Fonseca, M. E. Gonzalez, G. Jones, Megan L. Jones, L. Levin, Dustin R. Madison, M. A. McLaughlin, David J. Nice, Timothy T. Pennucci, S. M. Ransom, R. M. Shannon, Xavier Siemens, I. H. Stairs, Kevin Stovall, Joseph K. Swiggum, Weiwei Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillisecond pulsarPhysicsPulsarNoise (video)AstrophysicsGravitational waveWhite noiseChromatic scaleAchromatic lensAstronomyAcousticsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gravitational wave (GW) astronomy using a pulsar timing array requires high-quality millisecond pulsars (MSPs), correctable interstellar propagation delays, and high-precision measurements of pulse times of arrival. Here we identify noise in timing residuals that exceeds that predicted for arrival time estimation for MSPs observed by the North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves. We characterize the excess noise using variance and structure function analyses. We find that 26 out of 37 pulsars show inconsistencies with a white-noise-only model based on the short timescale analysis of each pulsar, and we demonstrate that the excess noise has a red power spectrum for 15 pulsars. We also decompose the excess noise into chromatic (radio-frequency-dependent) and achromatic components. Associating the achromatic red-noise component with spin noise and including additional power-spectrum-based estimates from the literature, we estimate a scaling law in terms of spin parameters (frequency and frequency derivative) and data-span length and compare it to the scaling law of Shannon & Cordes. We briefly discuss our results in terms of detection of GWs at nanohertz frequencies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0140.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.292 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations47
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences)Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207