MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4384882564 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2182

Polarization measurements of Arecibo-sky pulsars: Faraday rotations and emission-beam analyses

2023· article· en· W4384882564 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna M. Rankin, A. Venkataraman, J. M. Weisberg, Alice P. Curtin

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersUniversity of Central FloridaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsPulsarFaraday effectAstrophysicsPolarization (electrochemistry)PolarimetrySkyAstronomyGalaxyStokes parametersPopulationFaraday cageScatteringOpticsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present Faraday rotation measure (RM) values derived at L and P bands as well as some 60 Stokes-parameter profiles, both determined from our long-standing Arecibo dual-frequency pulsar polarimetry programmes. Many of the RM measurements were carried out towards the inner Galaxy and the anticentre on pulsars with no previous determination, while others are remeasurements intended to confirm or improve the accuracy of existing values. Stokes-parameter profiles are displayed for the 58 pulsars for which no meaningful Stokes profile at lower frequency is available and 4 without a high-frequency pair. This is a population that includes many distant pulsars in the inner Galaxy. A number of these polarized pulse profiles exhibit clear interstellar-scattering tails; none the less, we have attempted to interpret the associated emission-beam structures and to provide morphological classifications and geometrical models where possible.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→