Magnetic fields in the Large Magellanic Cloud and their connection to the Magellanic System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Studying the Magellanic System can help us understand the role that magnetic fields play in the evolution and structure of interacting low-mass galaxies. We have measured the Faraday rotation measure (RM) of 185 extra-galactic radio sources behind the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) to determine the structure of the magnetic field of the LMC. These observations were conducted with the CSIRO Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) with a frequency range of 1.6–3.0 GHz. Our observations double the density of the grid of RMs for the LMC. With these new RM observations in conjunction with previous measurements, we find that the |RM| on the east side of the LMC is greater than the west. Using dispersion measure information from known LMC pulsars, we find that the magnitude of the coherent line-of-sight (LOS) magnetic field, $B_{||}$, is weakest to the north-west of the LMC, and the random LOS magnetic field is stronger in the east side. We find that $B_{||}$ traces neutral hydrogen arm-like structures within the LMC. Overall, the LMC does not appear to have a magnetic field like that of the Small Magellanic Cloud and Magellanic Bridge, indicating that the LMC is not directly part of the ‘pan-Magellanic’ magnetic field.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".