MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133559635 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1438

Constraining the epoch of reionization with highly dispersed fast radio bursts

2021· article· en· W3133559635 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Pagano, Hannah Fronenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsReionizationRedshiftAstrophysicsPhysicsDark AgesGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The period in which hydrogen in the intergalactic medium (IGM) is ionized, known as the epoch of reionization (EoR), is still poorly understood. The timing and duration of the EoR is expected to be governed by the underlying astrophysics. Furthermore, most models of reionization predict a correlation between the density and ionization field. Here we consider using the mean dispersion measure (DM) of high redshift fast radio bursts (FRBs) as a probe of the underlying astrophysics and morphology of the EoR. To do this, we forecast observational scenarios by building mock data sets of non-repeating FRBs between redshifts 8 ≤ z ≤ 10. In our forecasts we assume a fiducial inside-out reionization scenario with midpoint of reionziation z = 2.0, and duration (i.e. the duration between mean ionized fraction of 0.25 to 0.75) Δz = 7.8. It is assumed that all FRBs have accompanying spectroscopic redshift measurements. We find that samples of 100 high redshift FRBs, in the above mentioned narrow redshift range, can rule out uncorrelated reionization at 68 per cent credibility, while larger samples, ≥104 FRBs, can rule out uncorrelated reionization at $95{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ credibility. We also find 100 high redshift FRBs can rule out scenarios where the Universe is entirely neutral at z = 10 with $68{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ credibility. Further, with ≥105 FRBs, we can constrain the duration Δz of reionization to $\Delta z = 2.0^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$ and the midpoint of reionization to $z = 7.8^{+0.4}_{-0.2}$ at 95 per cent credibility.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.182 · 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.

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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207