MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6891785461 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1609.00929

Detecting fast radio bursts at decametric wavelengths

2016· preprint· en· W6891785461 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedshiftPopulationScatteringTelescopeAbsorption (acoustics)COSMIC cancer databaseWavelengthObservatory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are highly dispersed, sporadic radio pulses that are likely extragalactic in nature. Here we investigate the constraints on the source population from surveys carried out at frequencies $<1$~GHz. All but one FRB has so far been discovered in the 1--2~GHz band, but new and emerging instruments look set to become valuable probes of the FRB population at sub-GHz frequencies in the near future. In this paper, we consider the impacts of free-free absorption and multi-path scattering in our analysis via a number of different assumptions about the intervening medium. We consider previous low frequency surveys alongwith an ongoing survey with the University of Technology digital backend for the Molonglo Observatory Synthesis Telescope (UTMOST) as well as future observations with the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME) and the Hydrogen Intensity and Real-Time Analysis Experiment (HIRAX). We predict that CHIME and HIRAX will be able to observe $\sim$ 30 or more FRBs per day, even in the most extreme scenarios where free-free absorption and scattering can significantly impact the fluxes below 1~GHz. We also show that UTMOST will detect 1--2 FRBs per month of observations. For CHIME and HIRAX, the detection rates also depend greatly on the assumed FRB distance scale. Some of the models we investigated predict an increase in the FRB flux as a function of redshift at low frequencies. If FRBs are truly cosmological sources, this effect may impact future surveys in this band, particularly if the FRB population traces the cosmic star formation rate.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research→French-language works237,207→