MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405741809 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451885

Probing cluster magnetism with embedded and background radio sources in Planck clusters

2024· article· en· W4405741809 on OpenAlexaff
E. Osinga, R. J. van Weeren, L. Rudnick, Felipe Andrade-Santos, A. Bonafede, T. E. Clarke, K. J. Duncan, S. Giacintucci, H. J. A. Röttgering

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxy clusterJanskyFaraday effectCluster (spacecraft)GalaxyRedshiftAmplitudeMagnetic fieldRADIUSRadio galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic fields remain an elusive part of the content of galaxy clusters. Faraday rotation and depolarisation of extragalactic radio sources are useful probes, but the limited availability of polarised radio sources necessitates the stacking of clusters to study average magnetic field properties. We recently presented a Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array survey of the 124 most massive Planck clusters at low redshift ( z < 0.35), finding a clear depolarisation trend with the cluster impact parameter, with sources at smaller projected distances to the cluster centre showing more depolarisation. In this study, we combine the depolarisation information with the observed rotation measure (RM) and present an investigation of the average magnetic field properties of the sample, using both background sources and sources embedded in clusters. We observe a significant increase in the RM scatter, σ RRM , closer to the cluster centres. Averaging all 124 clusters, we find a scatter within R 500 of σ RRM = 209 ± 37 rad m −2 , with background sources and cluster members showing similar values (200 ± 33 and 219 ± 66 rad m −2 , respectively). In the simple assumption of a uniform amplitude magnetic field with a single fluctuation scale Λ c , this translates to an average magnetic field strength of 2 (Λ c /10 kpc) −0.5 μG. The profile of σ RRM as a function of the projected radius is inconsistent with a model that has a simple scaling B ∝ n e η , with an observed deficit near the centre of clusters possibly caused by the fact that the highest RM sources near the centre of clusters are depolarised. Combining depolarisation and RM in a full forward model, we find that the magnetic field power spectrum roughly agrees with the Kolmogorov value, but that none of the Gaussian random field models can fully explain the observed relatively flat profiles. This implies that more sophisticated models of cluster magnetic fields in a cosmological context are needed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→