MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184928276 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140981

Constraining particle acceleration in Sgr A<sup>⋆</sup>with simultaneous GRAVITY,<i>Spitzer</i>,<i>NuSTAR</i>, and<i>Chandra</i>observations

2021· article· en· W3184928276 on OpenAlexaff
R. Abuter, A. Amorim, Michi Bauböck, F. K. Baganoff, Jean-Philippe Berger, Hope Boyce, H. Bonnet, W. Brandner, Y. Clénet, R. Davies, P. T. de Zeeuw, Jason Dexter, Yigit Dallilar, A. Drescher, A. Eckart, F. Eisenhauer, G. G. Fazio, N. M. Förster Schreiber, Karl Foster, Charles F. Gammie, P. García, F. Gao, É. Gendron, R. Genzel, S. Gillessen, Mark Gurwell, M. Habibi, Daryl Haggard, C. J. Hailey, Fiona A. Harrison, X. Haubois, G. Heißel, Thomas Henning, S. Hippler, Joseph L. Hora, M. Horrobin, Alejandra Jiménez-Rosales, L. Jochum, L. Jocou, A. Kaufer, P. Kervella, S. Lacour, V. Lapeyrère, J.-B. Le Bouquin, Pierre Léna, Patrick Lowrance, D. Lutz, Sera Markoff, Kaya Mori, M. Morris, Joey Neilsen, M. Nowak, T. Ott, T. Paumard, K. Perraut, G. Perrin, G. Ponti, O. Pfuhl, S. Rabien, G. Rodríguez-Coira, J. Shangguan, Thomas Shimizu, Silvia Scheithauer, H. A. Smith, J. Stadler, Daniel Stern, O. Straub, C. Straubmeier, E. Sturm, L. J. Tacconi, F. Vincent, S. D. von Fellenberg, Idel Waisberg, F. Widmann, E. Wieprecht, E. Wiezorrek, S. P. Willner, Gunther Witzel, J. Woillez, Ş. Yazıcı, André Young, Shuo Zhang, G. Zins

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaJet Propulsion LaboratoryNuclear Safety and Security CommissionHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsAccelerationParticle accelerationAstronomyClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the time-resolved spectral analysis of a bright near-infrared and moderate X-ray flare of Sgr A ⋆ . We obtained light curves in the M , K , and H bands in the mid- and near-infrared and in the 2 − 8 keV and 2 − 70 keV bands in the X-ray. The observed spectral slope in the near-infrared band is νL ν ∝ ν 0.5 ± 0.2 ; the spectral slope observed in the X-ray band is νL ν ∝ ν −0.7 ± 0.5 . Using a fast numerical implementation of a synchrotron sphere with a constant radius, magnetic field, and electron density (i.e., a one-zone model), we tested various synchrotron and synchrotron self-Compton scenarios. The observed near-infrared brightness and X-ray faintness, together with the observed spectral slopes, pose challenges for all models explored. We rule out a scenario in which the near-infrared emission is synchrotron emission and the X-ray emission is synchrotron self-Compton. Two realizations of the one-zone model can explain the observed flare and its temporal correlation: one-zone model in which the near-infrared and X-ray luminosity are produced by synchrotron self-Compton and a model in which the luminosity stems from a cooled synchrotron spectrum. Both models can describe the mean spectral energy distribution (SED) and temporal evolution similarly well. In order to describe the mean SED, both models require specific values of the maximum Lorentz factor γ max , which differ by roughly two orders of magnitude. The synchrotron self-Compton model suggests that electrons are accelerated to γ max ∼ 500, while cooled synchrotron model requires acceleration up to γ max ∼ 5 × 10 4 . The synchrotron self-Compton scenario requires electron densities of 10 10 cm −3 that are much larger than typical ambient densities in the accretion flow. Furthermore, it requires a variation of the particle density that is inconsistent with the average mass-flow rate inferred from polarization measurements and can therefore only be realized in an extraordinary accretion event. In contrast, assuming a source size of 1 R S , the cooled synchrotron scenario can be realized with densities and magnetic fields comparable with the ambient accretion flow. For both models, the temporal evolution is regulated through the maximum acceleration factor γ max , implying that sustained particle acceleration is required to explain at least a part of the temporal evolution of the flare.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations60
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207