MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205307111 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3771

Astrometric excess noise in <i>Gaia</i> EDR3 and the search for X-ray binaries

2021· article· en· W4205307111 on OpenAlexaff
P. Gandhi, D. A. H. Buckley, P. A. Charles, S. T. Hodgkin, Simone Scaringi, C. Knigge, A. R. Rao, John A. Paice, Yue Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Research FoundationUK-India Education and Research InitiativeNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationEuropean Space AgencyUniversity Grants Commission
KeywordsPhysicsParallaxAstrophysicsNoise (video)Binary numberAstronomyProper motionSample (material)StarsArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Astrometric noise (ϵ) in excess of parallax and proper motion is a potential signature of orbital wobble (ω) of individual components in binary star systems. The combination of X-ray selection with astrometric noise could then be a powerful tool for robustly isolating accreting binaries in large surveys. Here, we mine the Gaia EDR3 catalogue for Galactic sources with significant values of astrometric noise over the parameter space expected for known and candidate X-ray binaries (XRBs). Cross-matching our sample with the Chandra Source Catalogue returns a primary sample of ≈6500 X-ray sources with significant ϵ. X-ray detection efficiency for objects with significant ϵ is a factor of ≈4.5 times higher than in a matched control sample exhibiting low ϵ. The primary sample branches off the main sequence much more than control objects in colour–mag space, and includes a higher fraction of known binaries, variables, and young stellar object class types. However, values of ϵ reported in the Gaia pipeline releases so far can exceed expectations for individual XRBs with known semimajor axis size and other system parameters. It is likely that other factors (possibly attitude and modelling uncertainties, as well as source variability) currently dominate the observed excess noise in such systems. Confirmation of their nature must therefore await future Gaia releases. The full X-ray matched catalogue is released here to enable legacy 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→