MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203789703 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac223b

A Local Universe Host for the Repeating Fast Radio Burst FRB 20181030A

2021· article· en· W3203789703 on OpenAlexaff
Mohit Bhardwaj, A. Yu. Kirichenko, Daniele Michilli, Y. D. Mayya, V. M. Kaspi, B. M. Gaensler, Mubdi Rahman, Shriharsh P. Tendulkar, Emmanuel Fonseca, Alexander Josephy, Calvin Leung, Marcus Merryfield, Emily Petroff, Ziggy Pleunis, Pranav Sanghavi, Paul Scholz, Kaitlyn Shin, Kendrick M. Smith, I. H. Stairs

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of TorontoMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsFast radio burstPhysicsGalaxyRedshiftLuminosityHost (biology)SkyCosmic distance ladderPopulationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report on the host association of FRB 20181030A, a repeating fast radio burst (FRB) with a low dispersion measure (103.5 pc cm −3 ) discovered by the CHIME/FRB Collaboration et al. Using baseband voltage data saved for its repeat bursts, we localize the FRB to a sky area of 5.3 arcmin 2 (90% confidence). Within the FRB localization region, we identify NGC 3252 as the most promising host with an estimated chance-coincidence probability <2.5 × 10 −3 . Moreover, we do not find any other galaxy with M r < −15 AB mag within the localization region to the maximum estimated FRB redshift of 0.05. This rules out a dwarf host 5 times less luminous than any FRB host discovered to date. NGC 3252 is a star-forming spiral galaxy and at a distance of ≈20 Mpc, it is one of the closest FRB hosts discovered thus far. From our archival radio data search, we estimate a 3 σ upper limit on the luminosity of a persistent compact radio source (source size < 0.3 kpc at 20 Mpc) at 3 GHz to be 2 × 10 26 erg s −1 Hz −1 , at least 1500 times smaller than that of the FRB 20121102A persistent radio source. We also argue that a population of young millisecond magnetars alone cannot explain the observed volumetric rate of repeating FRBs. Finally, FRB 20181030A is a promising source for constraining FRB emission models due to its proximity and we strongly encourage its multi-wavelength follow-up.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations99
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207