MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401746783 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad64d1

Host Galaxies for Four Nearby CHIME/FRB Sources and the Local Universe FRB Host Galaxy Population

2024· article· en· W4401746783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohit Bhardwaj, Daniele Michilli, A. Yu. Kirichenko, Obinna Modilim, Kaitlyn Shin, V. M. Kaspi, Bridget C. Andersen, Tomás Cassanelli, Charanjot Brar, Shami Chatterjee, Amanda M. Cook, Fengqiu Adam Dong, Emmanuel Fonseca, B. M. Gaensler, Adaeze L. Ibik, Jane Kaczmarek, Adam Lanman, Calvin Leung, Kiyoshi W. Masui, Ayush Pandhi, Aaron B. Pearlman, Emily Petroff, Ziggy Pleunis, J. X. Prochaska, Masoud Rafiei-Ravandi, Ketan R. Sand, Paul Scholz, Kendrick M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHost (biology)GalaxyPopulationAstrophysicsAstronomyPhysicsBiologyEcologySociologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the host galaxies of four apparently nonrepeating fast radio bursts (FRBs), FRB 20181223C, FRB 20190418A, FRB 20191220A, and FRB 20190425A, reported in the first Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME/FRB) catalog. Our selection of these FRBs is based on a planned hypothesis testing framework where we search all CHIME/FRB Catalog-1 events that have low extragalactic dispersion measure (<100 pc cm −3 ), with high Galactic latitude (∣ b ∣ > 10°) and saved baseband data. We associate the selected FRBs with galaxies with moderate to high star formation rates located at redshifts between 0.027 and 0.071. We also search for possible multimessenger counterparts, including persistent compact radio and gravitational-wave sources, and find none. Utilizing the four FRB hosts from this study, along with the hosts of 14 published local Universe FRBs ( z < 0.1) with robust host association, we conduct an FRB host demographics analysis. We find all 18 local Universe FRB hosts in our sample to be spirals (or late-type galaxies), including the host of FRB 20220509G, which was previously reported to be elliptical. Using this observation, we scrutinize proposed FRB source formation channels and argue that core-collapse supernovae are likely the dominant channel to form FRB sources. Moreover, we infer no significant difference in the host properties of repeating and apparently nonrepeating FRBs in our local Universe FRB host sample. Finally, we find the burst rates of these four apparently nonrepeating FRBs to be consistent with those of the sample of localized repeating FRBs observed by CHIME/FRB. Therefore, we encourage further monitoring of these FRBs with more sensitive radio telescopes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations59
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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