MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408881577 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adb8cd

A 34 yr Timing Solution of the Redback Millisecond Pulsar Terzan 5A

2025· article· en· W4408881577 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew S. Rosenthal, S. M. Ransom, Kyle A. Corcoran, Megan E. DeCesar, P. C. C. Freire, J. W. T. Hessels, M. J. Keith, Ryan S. Lynch, A. G. Lyne, David J. Nice, I. H. Stairs, B. W. Stappers, Jay Strader, S. E. Thorsett, Ryan Urquhart

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian GovernmentCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsMillisecond pulsarAstrophysicsPulsarAstronomyGlobular clusterMillisecondNeutron starStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a 34 yr timing solution of the redback pulsar system Terzan 5A (Ter5A). Ter5A, also known as B1744−24A or J1748−2446A, has a 11.56 ms pulse period, a ~0.1 M ⊙ dwarf companion star, and an orbital period of 1.82 hr. Ter5A displays highly variable eclipses and orbital perturbations. Using new timing techniques, we have determined a phase-connected timing solution for this system over 34 yr. This is the longest ever published for a redback pulsar. We find that the pulsar’s spin variability is much larger than most globular cluster pulsars. In fact, of the nine redback pulsars with published or in-preparation long-term timing solutions, Ter5A is by far the noisiest. We see no evidence of strong correlations between orbital and spin variability of the pulsar. We also find that long-term astrometric timing measurements are likely too contaminated by this variability to be usable, and therefore they require careful short-term timing to determine reasonable positions. Finally, we measure an orbital period contraction of −2.5(3) × 10 −13 , which is likely dominated by the general relativistic orbital decay of the system. The effects of the orbital variability due to the redback nature of the pulsar are not needed to explain the observed orbital period derivative, but they are constrained to less than ~30% of the observed value.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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