MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208875364 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2833

Common-red-signal analysis with 24-yr high-precision timing of the European Pulsar Timing Array: inferences in the stochastic gravitational-wave background search

2021· article· en· W3208875364 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilScience and Technology Facilities CouncilAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsEphemerisPulsarGravitational wave backgroundSupermassive black holeMillisecond pulsarColors of noiseGravitational waveAmplitudeStatic timing analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present results from the search for a stochastic gravitational-wave background (GWB) as predicted by the theory of General Relativity using six radio millisecond pulsars from the Data Release 2 (DR2) of the European Pulsar Timing Array (EPTA) covering a timespan up to 24 yr. A GWB manifests itself as a long-term low-frequency stochastic signal common to all pulsars, a common red signal (CRS), with the characteristic Hellings-Downs (HD) spatial correlation. Our analysis is performed with two independent pipelines, ENTERPRISE, and TEMPONEST+FORTYTWO, which produce consistent results. A search for a CRS with simultaneous estimation of its spatial correlations yields spectral properties compatible with theoretical GWB predictions, but does not result in the required measurement of the HD correlation, as required for GWB detection. Further Bayesian model comparison between different types of CRSs, including a GWB, finds the most favoured model to be the common uncorrelated red noise described by a power law with $A = 5.13_{-2.73}^{+4.20} \times 10^{-15}$ and $\gamma = 3.78_{-0.59}^{+0.69}$ (95 per cent credible regions). Fixing the spectral index to γ = 13/3 as expected from the GWB by circular, inspiralling supermassive black hole binaries results in an amplitude of $A =2.95_{-0.72}^{+0.89} \times 10^{-15}$. We implement three different models, BAYESEPHEM, LINIMOSS, and EPHEMGP, to address possible Solar system ephemeris (SSE) systematics and conclude that our results may only marginally depend on these effects. This work builds on the methods and models from the studies on the EPTA DR1. We show that under the same analysis framework the results remain consistent after the data set extension.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations275
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207