MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297381505 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac903b

Toward a Precision Measurement of Binary Black Holes Formation Channels Using Gravitational Waves and Emission Lines

2022· article· en· W4297381505 on OpenAlexaff
Suvodip Mukherjee, Azadeh Moradinezhad Dizgah

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungSimons Foundation
KeywordsGravitational waveBinary numberBinary black holePhysicsAstrophysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The formation of compact objects—neutron stars, black holes, and supermassive black holes—and their connection to the chemical composition of galaxies is one of the central questions in astrophysics. We propose a novel data-driven, multi-messenger technique to address this question by exploiting the inevitable correlation between gravitational waves and atomic/molecular emission-line signals. For a fiducial probability distribution function p ( t d ) ∝ t d − κ of time delays, this method can provide a measurement of the minimum delay time of 0.5 Gyr and a power-law index of κ = 1 with a standard deviation of 0.12 (and 0.45) and 0.06 (and 0.34), respectively, from five years of LIGO–Virgo–KAGRA observations in synergy with SPHEREx line intensity mapping (and DESI emission-line galaxies). Such measurements will provide data-driven, multi-messenger constraints on the delay time distribution which is currently not well known.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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