MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225589044 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2202.05162

Do Magnetars' X-ray luminosities exceed their spin-down luminosities?

2022· preprint· en· W4225589044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H. Ardavan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetarPulsarPhysicsAstrophysicsNeutron starSpin (aerodynamics)LuminosityFlux (metallurgy)Galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevailing view that magnetars' X-ray luminosities exceed their spin-down luminosities is based on the assumption that the decay with distance of the flux of the X-rays received from magnetars obeys the inverse-square law. The results presented here, of testing the hypothesis of independence of luminosities and distances of magnetars by means of the Efron-Petrosian statistic, do not uphold this assumption however: they imply that the observational data in the McGill Magnetar Catalog are consistent with the dependence S\propto D^{-3/2} of the flux densities S of these objects on their distances D at substantially higher levels of significance than they are with the dependence S\propto D^{-2}. These results are not incompatible with the requirements of the conservation of energy because the radiation process described in Ardavan (2021, MNRAS, 507, 4530), by which the superluminally moving current sheet in the magnetosphere of a neutron star is shown to generate the slowly decaying X-ray pulses, is intrinsically transient. Once their over-estimation is rectified, the ratios of X-ray to spin-down luminosities of known magnetars turn out to be invariably lower than one. A magnetar differs from other rotationally powered pulsars only in that it is observed along a privileged latitudinal direction relative to its spin axis: the closer is the line of sight to a direction in which the radiation from the current sheet is focused, the higher the frequency content and the lower the decay rate with distance of the observed radiation. The outbursts characterizing the emission of a magnetar thus arise from sudden movements of its spin or magnetic axes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.128 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207