ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION IN APJ; DECEMBER 13, 2010 Preprint typeset using LATEX style emulateapj v. 11/10/09 MODELING THE MAGNETIC FIELD IN THE GALACTIC DISK USING NEW ROTATION MEASURE OBSERVATIONS FROM THE VERY LARGE ARRAY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have determined 194 Faraday rotation measures (RMs) of polarized extragalactic radio sources using new, multi-channel polarization observations at frequencies around 1.4 GHz from the Very Large Array (VLA) in the Galactic plane at 17 ◦ ≤ l ≤ 63 ◦ and 205 ◦ ≤ l ≤ 253◦. This catalog fills in gaps in the RM coverage of the Galactic plane between the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey and Southern Galactic Plane Survey. Using this catalog we have tested the validity of recently-proposed axisymmetric and bisymmetric models of the large-scale (or regular) Galactic magnetic field, and found that of the existing models we tested, an axisymmetric spiral model with reversals occurring in rings (as opposed to along spiral arms) best matched our observations. Building on this, we have performed our own modeling, using RMs from both extragalactic sources and pulsars. By developing independent models for the magnetic field in the outer and inner Galaxy, we conclude that in the inner Galaxy, the magnetic field closely follows the spiral arms, while in the outer Galaxy, the field is consistent with being purely azimuthal. Furthermore, the models contain no reversals in the outer Galaxy, and together
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.151 | 0.110 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".