Are blazars above the blazar sequence a significant source of IceCube neutrinos?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The recent association of two flaring blazars (TXS 0506+056 and 3HSP J095507.9+355101) with IceCube neutrinos strongly suggests that blazars are at least one source of high-energy neutrinos. A peculiar characteristic of these two blazars is that they both appear to lie above the well-known blazar sequence, and they move further above the blazar sequence during the neutrino emission. Although the reason for this peculiarity is unclear, it may indicate a link between blazar SED properties and neutrino emission. Here, we test whether blazars lying above the blazar sequence are overrepresented in IceCube neutrino error regions. We spatially cross-match IceCube error regions with a sample of γ-ray blazars from the Fermi-LAT 4LAC catalogue, as a function of the blazars’ distance in synchrotron peak frequency above the blazar sequence. We do not find a statistically significant excess of counterparts, and thus conclude that the current data cannot confirm that the sources above the blazar sequence are a significant source of IceCube neutrinos. However, we show that the inclusion of more recently detected IceCube events increases the likelihood of an excess of blazars above the blazar sequence, and suggest that this excess may reach statistical significance in the future as the sample of IceCube neutrino detections increases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".