MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3121052157 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfcd3

The NANOGrav 11 yr Data Set: Limits on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries in Galaxies within 500 Mpc

2021· article· en· W3121052157 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravitational waveSupermassive black holeGalaxyRedshiftMilky WayObservatoryBinary black holeMass ratioPulsarBlack hole (networking)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Supermassive black hole binaries (SMBHBs) should form frequently in galactic nuclei as a result of galaxy mergers. At subparsec separations, binaries become strong sources of low-frequency gravitational waves (GWs), targeted by Pulsar Timing Arrays. We used recent upper limits on continuous GWs from the North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) 11 yr data set to place constraints on putative SMBHBs in nearby massive galaxies. We compiled a comprehensive catalog of ∼44,000 galaxies in the local universe (up to redshift ∼0.05) and populated them with hypothetical binaries, assuming that the total mass of the binary is equal to the SMBH mass derived from global scaling relations. Assuming circular equal-mass binaries emitting at NANOGrav’s most sensitive frequency of 8 nHz, we found that 216 galaxies are within NANOGrav’s sensitivity volume. We ranked the potential SMBHBs based on GW detectability by calculating the total signal-to-noise ratio such binaries would induce within the NANOGrav array. We placed constraints on the chirp mass and mass ratio of the 216 hypothetical binaries. For 19 galaxies, only very unequal-mass binaries are allowed, with the mass of the secondary less than 10% that of the primary, roughly comparable to constraints on an SMBHB in the Milky Way. However, we demonstrated that the (typically large) uncertainties in the mass measurements can weaken the upper limits on the chirp mass. Additionally, we were able to exclude binaries delivered by major mergers (mass ratio of at least 1/4) for several of these galaxies. We also derived the first limit on the density of binaries delivered by major mergers purely based on GW data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→