MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103762999

No detectable radio emission from the magnetar-like pulsar in Kes 75

2013· article· en· W3103762999 on OpenAlexaff
Anne M. Archibald, V. M. Kaspi, Margaret A. Livingstone, M. A. McLaughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetarPhysicsPulsarAstrophysicsRadio telescopeAstronomyGreen Bank TelescopeSupernova remnantNeutron starRotation periodTelescopeSupernovaStars
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rotation-powered pulsar PSR J1846−0258 in the supernova remnant Kes 75 was recently shown to have exhibited magnetar-like X-ray bursts in mid-2006. Radio emission has not yet been observed from this source, but other magnetar-like sources have exhibited transient radio emission following X-ray bursts. We report on a deep 1.9 GHz radio observation of PSR J1846−0258 with the 100-m Green Bank Telescope in late 2007 designed to search for radio pulsations or bursts from this target. We have also analyzed three shorter serendipitous 1.4 GHz radio observations of the source taken with the 64-m Parkes telescope during the 2006 bursting period. We detected no radio emission from PSR J1846−0258 in either the Green Bank or Parkes datasets. We place an upper limit of 4.9 µJy on coherent pulsed emission from PSR J1846−0258 based on the 2007 November 2 observation, and an upper limit of 27 µJy around the time of the X-ray bursts. Serendipitously, we observed radio pulses from the nearby RRAT J1846−02, and place a 3σ confidence level upper limit on its period derivative of 1.7 × 10 −13, implying its surface dipole magnetic field is less than 2.6 × 10 13 G. Subject headings: pulsars: individual (PSR J1846−0258, RRAT J1846−02)

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University)Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207