Propagation effects at low frequencies seen in the LOFAR long-term monitoring of the periodically active FRB 20180916B
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT LOFAR (LOw Frequency ARray) has previously detected bursts from the periodically active, repeating fast radio burst (FRB) source FRB 20180916B down to unprecedentedly low radio frequencies of 110 MHz. Here, we present 11 new bursts in 223 more hours of continued monitoring of FRB 20180916B in the 110–188 MHz band with LOFAR. We place new constraints on the source’s activity window $w =4.3^{+0.7}_{-0.2}$ d and phase centre $\phi _{\mathrm{c}}^{\mathrm{LOFAR}} = 0.67^{+0.03}_{-0.02}$ in its 16.33-d activity cycle, strengthening evidence for its frequency-dependent activity cycle. Propagation effects like Faraday rotation and scattering are especially pronounced at low frequencies and constrain properties of FRB 20180916B’s local environment. We track variations in scattering and time–frequency drift rates, and find no evidence for trends in time or activity phase. Faraday rotation measure (RM) variations seen between June 2021 and August 2022 show a fractional change >50 per cent with hints of flattening of the gradient of the previously reported secular trend seen at 600 MHz. The frequency-dependent window of activity at LOFAR appears stable despite the significant changes in RM, leading us to deduce that these two effects have different causes. Depolarization of and within individual bursts towards lower radio frequencies is quantified using LOFAR’s large fractional bandwidth, with some bursts showing no detectable polarization. However, the degree of depolarization seems uncorrelated to the scattering time-scales, allowing us to evaluate different depolarization models. We discuss these results in the context of models that invoke rotation, precession, or binary orbital motion to explain the periodic activity of FRB 20180916B.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".