MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414424909 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staf1597

The non-uniform expansion of the Crab Nebula

2025· article· en· W4414424909 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Thomas Martin, D. Milisavljević, Tea Temim, S. Mandal, Paul C. Duffell, Laurent Drissen, Zegang Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCégep Garneau
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationFonds de recherche du QuébecNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEjectaPulsar wind nebulaCrab NebulaSupernovaPulsarNebulaSupernova remnantProper motion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present extensive proper motion measurements of the Crab Nebula made from Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope MegaPrime/MegaCam images taken in 2007, 2016, and 2019. A total of 19974 proper motion vectors with uncertainty ${<} 10$ mas yr$^{-1}$ located over the majority of the Crab Nebula are used to map the supernova remnant’s two-dimensional expansion properties that reflect the dynamics of the original explosion, acceleration of ejecta imparted by spin-down energy from the pulsar, and interaction between the ejecta and surrounding cicumstellar material (CSM). The average convergence date we derive is 1105.5$\pm$0.5 CE, which is 15–35 yr earlier compared to most previous estimates. We find that it varies as a function of position angle around the nebula, with the earliest date and smallest proper motions measured along the equator defined by the east and west bays. The lower acceleration of material along the equatorial plane may be indicative of the supernova’s interaction with a disc-like CSM geometry. Comparing our measurements to previous analytical solutions of the Crab’s expansion and our own numerical simulation using the moving mesh hydrodynamics code sprout, we conclude that the ejecta have relaxed closer to homologous expansion than expected for the commonly adopted pulsar spin-down age of $\tau \sim 700$ yr and a pulsar wind nebula (PWN) still evolving inside the flat part of the ejecta density profile. These findings provide further evidence that the PWN has reached the outer steep part of the supernova ejecta density profile and escaped the confines of the ejecta shell in some regions.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.190
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207