MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237077952 · doi:10.1002/asna.200610576

Extragalactic radio sources, IGM magnetic fields, and AGN‐based energy flows

2006· article· en· W4237077952 on OpenAlexfundno aff
P. P. Kronberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomische Nachrichten · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryLaboratory Directed Research and DevelopmentNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsFaraday effectMagnetic fieldAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyIntergalactic travelSynchrotron radiationRadio galaxyFaraday cageActive galactic nucleusAstronomyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract I review the interconnections between extragalactic radio sources and extragalactic magnetic fields in large‐scale structure. I focus on energy flows and magnetic fields arising from AGN‐powered radio sources. A new combined Faraday rotation (RM) and galaxy count analysis is described which provides the first Faraday RM test for magnetic field strengths in regions of local cosmological large‐scale structure. I also describe both recent and new results that probe intergalactic magnetic fields via faint synchrotron radiation at the lowest detectable levels. Evidence for the cosmologically early generation of significant magnetic fields in galaxy systems is briefly reviewed, including initial results of a new global RM probe out to redshifts greater than 3. In the course of reviewing these new results, I comment on some desirable specifications of next‐generation instruments. (© 2006 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomische NachrichtenSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207