MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399511807 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad53c5

Constraining the Selection-corrected Luminosity Function and Total Pulse Count for Radio Transients

2024· article· en· W4399511807 on OpenAlexafffund
Fengqiu Adam Dong, Antonio Herrera-Martín, I. H. Stairs, Radu V. Craiu, Kathryn Crowter, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, Emmanuel Fonseca, Deborah C. Good, James W. McKee, Bradley W. Meyers, Aaron B. Pearlman, David C. Stenning

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityOntario Power GenerationUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPrecursory Research for Embryonic Science and TechnologyFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill Space InstituteAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaUniversity of TorontoCanada Foundation for InnovationSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryMcGill UniversityCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsPulsarPhysicsAstrophysicsLuminosityLuminosity functionScalingAlgorithmComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Studying transient phenomena, such as individual pulses from pulsars, has garnered considerable attention in the era of astronomical big data. Of specific interest to this study are rotating radio transients (RRATs), nulling, and intermittent pulsars. This study introduces a new algorithm named LuNfit, tailored to correct the selection biases originating from the telescope and detection pipelines. Ultimately LuNfit estimates the intrinsic luminosity distribution and nulling fraction of the single pulses emitted by pulsars. LuNfit relies on Bayesian nested sampling so that the parameter space can be fully explored. Bayesian nested sampling also provides the additional benefit of simplifying model comparisons through the Bayes ratio. The robustness of LuNfit is shown through simulations and applying LuNfit onto pulsars with known nulling fractions. LuNfit is then applied to three RRATs, J0012+5431, J1538+1523, and J2355+1523, extracting their intrinsic luminosity distribution and burst rates. We find that their nulling fractions are 0.4(2), 0.749(5), and 0.995(2), respectively. We further find that a log-normal distribution likely describes the single pulse luminosity distribution of J0012+5431 and J1538+1523, while the Bayes ratio for J2355+1523 slightly favors an exponential distribution. We show the conventional method of correcting selection effects by “scaling up” the missed fraction of radio transients can be unreliable when the mean luminosity of the source is faint relative to the telescope sensitivity. Finally, we discuss the limitations of the current implementation of LuNfit while also delving into potential enhancements that would enable LuNfit to be applied to sources with complex pulse morphologies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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