MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390701566 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1184

Modeling Current and Future High-cadence Surveys of Repeating Fast Radio Burst Populations

2024· article· en· W4390701566 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyle McGregor, D. R. Lorimer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsRedshiftFast radio burstPoisson distributionRepeater (horology)CadencePopulationAstrophysicsSkyMonte Carlo methodAstronomyStatisticsComputer scienceGalaxyAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME) interferometer has revealed a large number of fast radio bursts (FRBs), including a sizable population that demonstrates repeating behavior. This transit facility, employing a real-time FRB search pipeline, continually scans the sky with declinations between −10° and 90° for events with fluences ⪆0.4 Jy ms. We simulate a population of repeating FRBs by performing Monte Carlo simulations of underlying source populations processed through a mock CHIME/FRB observing pipeline. Assuming intrinsic repeater rates follow a Poisson distribution, we test assumptions about the burst populations of the repeater sample, and construct models of the FRB sample assuming various cosmological distributions. We infer the completeness of CHIME/FRB observations as a function of observing cadence and redshifts out to 0.5. We find that, if all simulated bursts have a fixed Poisson probability of repetition over their integrated time of observation, repeating burst detections across comoving volume should continue to grow near linearly on the order of decades. We predict that around 170 of the current CHIME/FRB one-off sources will ultimately repeat. We also make projections for FRB repeaters by future facilities and demonstrate that the number of repeaters they find could saturate on a ∼3 yr timescale.

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)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→