MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102355433

New Constraints on the Energetics, Progenitor Mass, and Age of the Supernova Remnant G292.0+1.8 Containing PSR J1124-5916

2003· article· en· W3102355433 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPulsarAstrophysicsSupernova remnantPulsar planetMillisecond pulsarSupernovaAstronomyPulsar wind nebulaEjectaBinary pulsar
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present spatially resolved spectroscopy of the supernova remnant (SNR) G292.0+1.8 with the Chandra X-ray observatory. This SNR contains the 135 ms pulsar, J1124-5916. We apply non-equilibrium ionization (NEI) models to the data. By comparing the derived abundances with those predicted from nucleosynthesis models, we estimate a progenitor mass of 30-40 solar masses. We also derive the intrinsic parameters of the supernova explosion such as its energy, the age of the SNR, the blast wave velocity, and the swept-up mass. In the Sedov interpretation, our estimated SNR age of 2,600 years is close to the pulsar's characteristic age of 2,900 years. This confirms the pulsar/SNR association and relaxes the need for the pulsar to have a non-canonical value for the braking index, a large period at birth or a large transverse velocity. We discuss the properties of the pulsar wind nebula (PWN) in the light of the Kennel and Coroniti model and estimate the pulsar wind magnetization parameter. We also report the first evidence for steepening of the power law spectral index with increasing radius from the pulsar.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations26
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207