The science case for simultaneous mm-wavelength receivers in radio astronomy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review arose from the European Radio Astronomy Technical Forum (ERATec) meeting held in Firenze, October 2015, and aims to highlight the breadth and depth of the high-impact science that will be aided and assisted by the use of simultaneous mm-wavelength receivers. Recent results and opportunities are presented and discussed from the fields of: continuum VLBI (observations of weak sources, astrometry, observations of AGN cores in spectral index and Faraday rotation), spectral line VLBI (observations of evolved stars and massive star-forming regions) and time domain observations of the flux variations arising in the compact jets of X-ray binaries. Our survey brings together a large range of important science applications, which will greatly benefit from simultaneous observing at mm-wavelengths. Such facilities are essential to allow these applications to become more efficient, more sensitive and more scientifically robust. In some cases without simultaneous receivers the science goals are simply unachievable. Similar benefits would exist in many other high frequency astronomical fields of research.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it