MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308717995 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac96f0

Polarized Emission from Four Supernova Remnants in the THOR Survey

2022· article· en· W4308717995 on OpenAlexafffund
R. Shanahan, J. M. Stil, L. D. Anderson, H. Beuther, P. F. Goldsmith, M. R. Rugel, J. D. Soler, J. Syed

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPhysicsFaraday effectPolarization (electrochemistry)Faraday cageAstrophysicsSupernovaStokes parametersOpticsMagnetic fieldScattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present polarization and Faraday rotation for the supernova remnants (SNRs) G46.8 − 0.3, G43.3 − 0.2, G41.1 − 0.3, and G39.2 − 0.3 in the L-band (1–2 GHz) radio continuum in the H i/OH/Recombination line survey. We detect polarization from G46.8 − 0.3, G43.3 − 0.2, and G39.2 − 0.3 but find upper limits at the 1% level of Stokes I for G41.1 − 0.3. For G46.8 − 0.3 and G39.2 − 0.3, the fractional polarization varies on small scales from 1% to ∼6%. G43.3 − 0.2 is less polarized with fractional polarization ≲3%. We find upper limits at the 1% level for the brighter regions in each SNR with no evidence for associated enhanced Faraday depolarization. We observe significant variation in Faraday depth and fractional polarization on angular scales down to the resolution limit of 16″. Approximately 6% of our polarization detections from G46.8 − 0.3 and G39.2 − 0.3 exhibit two-component Faraday rotation and 14% of polarization detections in G43.3 − 0.2 are multicomponent. For G39.2 − 0.3, we find a bimodal Faraday depth distribution with a narrow peak and a broad peak for all polarization detections as well as for the subset with two-component Faraday rotation. We identify the narrow peak with the front side of the SNR and the broad peak with the back side. Similarly, we interpret the observed Faraday depth distribution of G46.8 − 0.3 as a superposition of the distributions from the front side and the back side. We interpret our results as evidence for a partially filled shell with small-scale magnetic field structure and internal Faraday rotation.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207