MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221152439 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac6b35

Is the Black-widow Pulsar PSR J1555–2908 in a Hierarchical Triple System?

2022· article· en· W4221152439 on OpenAlexfundno aff
L. Nieder, M. Kerr, C. J. Clark, P. Bruel, H. Thankful Cromartie, S. M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareHigh Energy Accelerator Research OrganizationIstituto Nazionale di AstrofisicaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesVetenskapsrådetNational Science FoundationAgenzia Spaziale ItalianaJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionNational Radio Astronomy ObservatoryCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationAssociated UniversitiesMax-Planck-GesellschaftSpace Telescope Science Institute
KeywordsPulsarMillisecond pulsarPhysicsNeutron starFermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeAstrophysicsNoise (video)AstronomyRotation (mathematics)TelescopeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 559 Hz black-widow pulsar PSR J1555−2908, originally discovered in radio, is also a bright gamma-ray pulsar. Timing its pulsations using 12 yr of Fermi-Large Area Telescope gamma-ray data reveals long-term variations in its spin frequency that are much larger than is observed from other millisecond pulsars. While this variability in the pulsar rotation rate could be intrinsic “timing noise,” here we consider an alternative explanation: the variations arise from the presence of a very-low-mass third object in a wide multiyear orbit around the neutron star and its low-mass companion. With current data, this hierarchical-triple-system model describes the pulsar’s rotation slightly more accurately than the best-fitting timing noise model. Future observations will show if this alternative explanation is correct.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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