MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400415600 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad5310

Time Delay of Fast Radio Burst Population with Respect to the Star Formation History

2024· article· en· W4400415600 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hai-Nan Lin, Xinyi Li, Rui Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStar (game theory)AstrophysicsAstronomyPopulationPhysicsDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In spite of significant progress in the research of fast radio bursts (FRBs) in recent decades, their origin is still under extensive debate. Investigation of the population of FRBs can provide new insight into this interesting problem. In this paper, based on the first Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME)/FRB catalog, we construct a Bayesian framework to analyze the FRB population, with the selection effect of the CHIME telescope being properly taken into account. The energy function is modeled as the power law with an exponential cutoff. Four redshift distribution models are considered, i.e., the star formation history (SFH) model, and three time-delayed models (Gaussian delay, log-normal delay, and power-law delay). The free parameters are simultaneously constrained using the Bayesian inference method, and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) is used in model comparison. According to the BIC, the log-normal delay model fits the data best. The power-law delay model and Gaussian delay model can also give reasonable fits, although they are not as good as the log-normal delay model. However, the SFH model is strongly disfavored compared with the three time-delayed models. The energy function is tightly constrained and is almost independent of the redshift models, with the best-fitting power-law index α ≈ 1.8 and cut-off energy log ( E c / erg ) ≈ 42 . The FRB population shows on average a 3 ∼ 5 billion yr time delay with respect to the SFH. Therefore, the hypothesis that the FRB population traces the SFH is conclusively ruled out.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207