MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414431143 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556347

Constraining the origin of the long-term periodicity of FRB 20180916B with polarization position angle

2025· article· en· W4414431143 on OpenAlexaff
S. Bethapudi, Dongzi Li, L. G. Spitler, V. R. Marthi, Marlon Luis Bause, Robert Main, R. S. Wharton

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolarization (electrochemistry)Position angleNeutron starPosition (finance)StarsPhase (matter)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. The repeating fast radio burst (FRB) FRB 20180916B produces bursts in a 5.1 day active window that repeats with a 16.34 day period. Models have been proposed to explain the periodicity using dynamical phenomena of neutron stars such as rotation, precession, or orbital motion. The polarization position angle (PA) of the bursts can be used to distinguish and constrain the origin of the long-term periodicity of the FRB. Aims. We aim to study the PA variability on short (within an observation) and long timescales (from observation to observation). Given the periodicity of the source, we also study the PA variations within the active window and across multiple windows. Then, we compare the observed PA variability with the predictions of various dynamical progenitor models for the FRB. Methods. We used the calibrated burst dataset detected by uGMRT in Band 4 (650 MHz) published in our earlier work. We transformed the PA measured at 650 MHz to infinite frequency such that PAs measured in different observations are consistent, and finally we measured the changes within and across active windows. Results. We find that the PA of the bursts varies according to the periodicity of the source. We constrained the PA variability to be less than seven degrees on timescales less than four hours for all MJDs. We also tentatively find that the PA varies within an active window with a variability of a few degrees per hour. In addition, we tentatively note the PA measured at the same phase in the active window varies from one cycle to another. Conclusions. Using the findings, we constrained the rotational, precession, and binary progenitor models involving compact objects, where the emission originates from the magnetosphere of the compact object. The rotational model partially agrees with the observed PA variability, but it requires further study to be fully constrained. We robustly rule out all flavors of precessional models where the precession of a neutron star either explains the periodicity of the FRB or the variability from one cycle to another. We can rule out the relativistic spin precession binary model. Lastly, we observed similarities between FRB 20180916B and an X-ray binary system, Her X 1, and explicitly note that the two sources exhibit a similar form of PA variability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae→French-language works237,207→