MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103983145

The Nearby Neutron Star RX J0720.4-3125 from Radio to X-rays

2003· article· en· W3103983145 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsPulsarNeutron starBlack-body radiationLuminosityAstronomyRADIUSObservatoryRadiationOptics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present radio, optical, ultraviolet, and X-ray observations of the isolated, thermally-emitting neutron star RX J0720.4-3125 using the Parkes radio telescope, the Very Large Array, the Hubble Space Telescope, and the Chandra X-ray Observatory. From these data we show that the optical/UV spectrum of RX J0720.4-3125 is not well fit by a Rayleigh-Jeans tail as previously thought, but is instead best fit by either a single non-thermal power-law or a combination of a Rayleigh-Jeans tail and a non-thermal power-law. Taken together with the X-ray spectrum, we find the best model for RX J0720.4-3125 to be two blackbodies plus a power-law, with the cool blackbody implying a radius of 11-13 km at an assumed distance of 300 pc. This is similar to many middle aged (10^{5-6} yr) radio pulsars such as PSR B0656+14, evidence supporting the hypothesis that RX J0720.4-3125 is likely to be an off-beam radio pulsar. The radio data limit the flux at 1.4 GHz to be <0.24 mJy, or a luminosity limit of 4*pi*d^2*F < 3e25*d_300^2 ergs/s, and we see no sign of extended nebulosity, consistent with expectations for a pulsar like RX J0720.4-3125.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations50
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207