Statistical Association between the Candidate Repeating FRB 20200320A and a Galaxy Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present results from angular cross correlations between select samples of CHIME/FRB repeaters and galaxies in three photometric galaxy surveys, which have shown correlations with the first CHIME/FRB catalog containing repeating and nonrepeating sources: Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) × SCOS, DESI-BGS, and DESI-LRG. We find a statistically significant correlation (p-value <0.001, after accounting for look-elsewhere factors) between a sample of repeaters with an extragalactic dispersion measure (DM) > 395 pc cm−3 and WISE × SCOS galaxies with redshift z > 0.275. We demonstrate that the correlation arises surprisingly because of a statistical association between FRB 20200320A (extragalactic DM ≈ 550 pc cm−3) and a galaxy group in the same dark matter halo at redshift z ≈ 0.32. We estimate that the host halo, along with an intervening halo at redshift z ≈ 0.12, accounts for at least ∼30% of the extragalactic DM. Our results strongly motivate incorporating galaxy group and cluster catalogs into direct host association pipelines for FRBs with ≲ 1 ′ localization precision, effectively utilizing the two-point information to constrain FRB properties such as their redshift and DM distributions. In addition, we find marginal evidence for a negative correlation at 99.4% confidence limit between a sample of repeating FRBs with baseband data (median extragalactic DM = 354 pc cm−3) and DESI-LRG galaxies with redshift 0.3 ≤ z < 0.45, suggesting that the repeaters might be more prone than apparent nonrepeaters to propagation effects in FRB–galaxy correlations due to intervening free electrons over angular scales ∼0.°5.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".