The MPIfR-MeerKAT Galactic Plane Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The MPIfR-MeerKAT Galactic Plane survey atL-band (MMGPS-L) is the most sensitive pulsar survey in the Southern Hemisphere, providing 78 discoveries in an area of 900 sq. deg. Here, we present a follow-up study of one of these new discoveries, PSR J1208−5936, a 28.71-ms recycled pulsar in a double neutron star system with an orbital period ofPb = 0.632 days and an eccentricity ofe = 0.348, merging within the Hubble time. Through timing of almost one year of observations, we detected the relativistic advance of periastron (ω̇ = 0.918(1) deg yr−1), resulting in a total system mass ofMt = 2.586(5) M⊙. We also achieved low-significance constraints on the amplitude of the Einstein delay and Shapiro delay, in turn yielding constraints on the pulsar mass (Mp = 1.26−0.25+0.13 M⊙), the companion mass (Mc = 1.32−0.13+0.25 M⊙), and the inclination angle (i = 57 ± 12°). This system is highly eccentric compared to other Galactic field double neutron stars with similar periods, possibly hinting at a larger-than-usual supernova kick during the formation of the second-born neutron star. The binary will merge within 7.2(2) Gyr due to the emission of gravitational waves, making it a progenitor of the neutron star merger events seen by ground-based gravitational wave observatories. With the improved sensitivity of the MMGPS-L, we updated the Milky Way neutron star merger rate to beRMWnew = 25−9+19Myr−1within 90% credible intervals, which is lower than previous studies based on known Galactic binaries owing to the lack of further detections despite the highly sensitive nature of the survey. This implies a local cosmic neutron star merger rate ofRlocalnew = 293−103+222Gpc−3yr−1, which is consistent with LIGO and Virgo O3 observations. With this, we also predict the observation of 10−4+8neutron star merger events during the LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA O4 run. We predict the uncertainties on the component masses and the inclination angle will be reduced to 5 × 10−3 M⊙and 0.4° after two decades of timing, and that in at least a decade from now the detection ofṖband the sky proper motion will serve to make an independent constraint of the distance to the system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.013 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".