adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Structure in the Magnetic Field of the Milky Way Disk and Halo Traced by Faraday Rotation
Authors: John M. Dickey, Jennifer West, Alec J. M. Thomson, T. L. Landecker, A. Bracco, E. Carretti, J. L. Han, A. S. Hill, Y. K. Ma, S. A. Mao, A. Ordog, Jo-Anne C. Brown, K. A. Douglas, A. Erceg, V. Jelić, R. Kothes, M. Wolleben
Figure caption: Amplitudes (C 1 and C 2) and phases (ϕ 1 and ϕ 2) of the ﹩\sin \,({\ell })﹩ and ﹩\sin \,(2{\ell })﹩ terms, from Table 1. The GMIMS results are on the left, the extragalactic on the right. The values of the fitted parameters (Equation (1)) are shown in blue for the ﹩\sin \,({\ell })﹩, and red for the ﹩\sin \,(2{\ell })﹩ terms. The curves are shaded for latitudes where the amplitudes, C 1 and/or C 2, are greater than 5σ. At negative latitudes, much of the third and fourth quadrants are not observable in the GMIMS survey. Because of this, points on the left side of the left panel have large errors, and they are not shaded.
Paper: Structure in the Magnetic Field of the Milky Way Disk and Halo Traced by Faraday Rotation
Authors: John M. Dickey, Jennifer West, Alec J. M. Thomson, T. L. Landecker, A. Bracco, E. Carretti, J. L. Han, A. S. Hill, Y. K. Ma, S. A. Mao, A. Ordog, Jo-Anne C. Brown, K. A. Douglas, A. Erceg, V. Jelić, R. Kothes, M. Wolleben
Figure caption: Two maps of the Galactic RM. The upper panel shows the GMIMS High-Band North first-moment map made with data from the DRAO 26 m telescope (Wolleben et al. 2021). The lower panel shows the Galactic estimate based on extragalactic source RMs (Hutschenreuter et al. 2022). The red box indicates the area dominated by the North Polar Spur in Stokes I synchrotron emission; see Section 2.3 below. The green dashed lines illustrate two sets of bins at constant latitude, used to make the two panels in Figure 2.
Paper: Structure in the Magnetic Field of the Milky Way Disk and Halo Traced by Faraday Rotation
Authors: John M. Dickey, Jennifer West, Alec J. M. Thomson, T. L. Landecker, A. Bracco, E. Carretti, J. L. Han, A. S. Hill, Y. K. Ma, S. A. Mao, A. Ordog, Jo-Anne C. Brown, K. A. Douglas, A. Erceg, V. Jelić, R. Kothes, M. Wolleben
Figure caption: Comparison of GMIMS and extragalactic RMs at latitudes −45° < b < −40°. In this case, the two surveys give roughly similar results in the first and second Galactic quadrants (0 < ℓ < π), but the GMIMS survey misses most of the third and fourth quadrants. The fitting is poorly constrained as a result, and the constants are ill determined. In addition, there is very little correlation between the RMs from the two surveys (right panel).
Paper: Structure in the Magnetic Field of the Milky Way Disk and Halo Traced by Faraday Rotation
Authors: John M. Dickey, Jennifer West, Alec J. M. Thomson, T. L. Landecker, A. Bracco, E. Carretti, J. L. Han, A. S. Hill, Y. K. Ma, S. A. Mao, A. Ordog, Jo-Anne C. Brown, K. A. Douglas, A. Erceg, V. Jelić, R. Kothes, M. Wolleben
Figure caption: The effect of blanking an area that covers the bright emission region corresponding to the North Polar Spur (25° < b < 70°, and 20° < ℓ < 70°). The latitude ranges are the same as those shown in Figure 2.
Paper: Structure in the Magnetic Field of the Milky Way Disk and Halo Traced by Faraday Rotation
Authors: John M. Dickey, Jennifer West, Alec J. M. Thomson, T. L. Landecker, A. Bracco, E. Carretti, J. L. Han, A. S. Hill, Y. K. Ma, S. A. Mao, A. Ordog, Jo-Anne C. Brown, K. A. Douglas, A. Erceg, V. Jelić, R. Kothes, M. Wolleben
Figure caption: The Pearson correlation coefficient, R, vs. Galactic latitude, from Table 2. The blue dots show the slope, ﹩\tfrac{{\rm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{RM}}_{\mathrm{ExGal}}}{{\rm{\Delta }}{\mathrm{RM}}_{\mathrm{GMIMS}}}﹩, of the best-fit line (right-hand axis). Dots are plotted only for latitudes 10° < ∣b∣ < 50° where the correlation is strong (R > 0.5).
Paper: Structure in the Magnetic Field of the Milky Way Disk and Halo Traced by Faraday Rotation
Authors: John M. Dickey, Jennifer West, Alec J. M. Thomson, T. L. Landecker, A. Bracco, E. Carretti, J. L. Han, A. S. Hill, Y. K. Ma, S. A. Mao, A. Ordog, Jo-Anne C. Brown, K. A. Douglas, A. Erceg, V. Jelić, R. Kothes, M. Wolleben
Figure caption: Scatter plots of median values from the extragalactic RM map of Hutschenreuter et al. (2022) vs. corresponding median values of RM from the GMIMS survey for the latitude range +20° < b < + 50° (left panel) and +50° < b < + 70° (right panel). On the left, the correlation coefficient is R = 0.69, and the slope of the best-fit line is 1.1 ± 0.08, whereas on the right there is no correlation (R = −0.03). The median errors on the points are shown in the insets. On the right (high latitudes), the standard deviation of the GMIMS values is 9.8 (x-axis), and for the extragalactic values, the standard deviation is 6.1 (y-axis).
Paper: Flexible Models for Galaxy Star Formation Histories Both Shift and Scramble the Optical Color–Mass-to-light Ratio (M/L) Relationship
Authors: Yijia Li, 轶佳 李, Joel Leja
Figure caption: Prior and data distributions for (g − r) and ﹩\mathrm{log}(M/{L}_{g})﹩. The upper and lower panels show the simple model and Prospector–α respectively. Prospector–α priors describe the data better as the simple priors are too wide. The Prospector–α fits provide systematically higher ﹩\mathrm{log}(M/{L}_{g})﹩ by 0.12 dex and higher (g − r) by 0.06 mag. We show in Section 4.3 and Section 4.4 that the offsets are mainly driven by different mass-weighted age measurements and the inclusion of nebular emission, respectively.
Paper: Flexible Models for Galaxy Star Formation Histories Both Shift and Scramble the Optical Color–Mass-to-light Ratio (M/L) Relationship
Authors: Yijia Li, 轶佳 李, Joel Leja
Figure caption: The shaded regions show the relationships between two colors (g − r) and (J − K), and four galaxy properties: ﹩\mathrm{log}(M/{L}_{g})﹩, diffuse dust optical path, age weighted by total mass formed, and stellar metallicity from priors of the simple model (blue) and Prospector–α (orange) at z = 1. 1σ and 3σ contours are in solid lines. The SED model priors constrain a notably tight optical color–M */L relationship. The NIR color cannot constrain M */L as tightly, and no other stellar population parameter is as tightly constrained by a color.
Paper: Flexible Models for Galaxy Star Formation Histories Both Shift and Scramble the Optical Color–Mass-to-light Ratio (M/L) Relationship
Authors: Yijia Li, 轶佳 李, Joel Leja
Figure caption: Relationship between the rest-frame (g − r) color and stellar mass-to-light ratio ﹩\mathrm{log}(M/{L}_{g})﹩ for the simple and Prospector–α model. The yellow dotted lines show the median of the prior distribution. Black dots represent the data from SED fits. The red solid lines are the median relation estimated by the redshift-averaged hierarchical Bayesian models. We also show in the Prospector–α plot the median relationship for the simple model as a reference line. The shaded regions show the 1σ and 2σ ranges of the model posteriors. The two models show similar median relationship from the HBM despite the significant differences in their model assumptions. The Prospector–α model has greater scatter around the median relation than the simple model. The simple HBM fits are not able to describe the behavior at the bluest colors.
Paper: Flexible Models for Galaxy Star Formation Histories Both Shift and Scramble the Optical Color–Mass-to-light Ratio (M/L) Relationship
Authors: Yijia Li, 轶佳 李, Joel Leja
Figure caption: The redshift dependence of the color–M */L relationship. The Prospector–α relationship evolves with redshift while the simple relationship does not. The top panels show the data from SED fits color-coded by redshift. The bottom panels show the HBM results. The solid lines represent the median relations from the HBMs. The shaded regions cover the 16th and 84th percentiles of the posterior distribution. The dashed lines in the lower right plot show the simple relationships, as a comparison to the Prospector–α relationships represented by solid lines.
Paper: Flexible Models for Galaxy Star Formation Histories Both Shift and Scramble the Optical Color–Mass-to-light Ratio (M/L) Relationship
Authors: Yijia Li, 轶佳 李, Joel Leja
Figure caption: Comparison between the HBM posteriors and the SED-fitting posteriors for the Prospector–α model. Left: the logarithmic density distribution of HBM posteriors marginalized by the redshift and color distribution of the data. It is also convolved with data uncertainties for comparing to the data directly. Middle: the logarithmic density distribution of the sum of Prospector–α SED-fitting posteriors. Right: the fractional distribution difference between the HBM and SED-fitting posteriors. Note that this is not the quantity that our HBM minimizes, and we only use this figure to visualize how well our HBM describes the data. The comparison shows that the HBM performs good fits where the most data are, but is not able to capture the behavior of the upper edge of the (g − r)–﹩\mathrm{log}(M/{L}_{g})﹩ distribution where there is little data.
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: Escape energies for combined photon splitting and pair creation for photons emitted from the stellar surface (dashed curves) or along twisted magnetic field loops (solid curves) with  B  p  = 100 , and for  p = 0.25,  0.5,  0.75,  and  1.0 , generally ordered from top to bottom (from outside to inside on the lower left) as indicated in the panel legends. Emission is parallel to the local field (Θ e  = 0°). The heavyweight portion of the curves marks portions of the field lines where pair creation dominates photon splitting in determining the escape energy. The top and right panels depict the polarization-averaged escape energies for field loops with footpoint colatitudes  θ  f  = 15°,  30°, and  45°, respectively. The bottom left panel displays the ratio of  ⊥  mode escape energy  ε esc,⊥  to the polarization-averaged escape energy  ε esc,ave  for  θ  f  = 15°  that is depicted in the top left panel. The colored triangles (γ  e  = 10) and squares (γ  e  = 100) represent the emission colatitude where the escape energy is equal to the maximum energy ﹩\,{\varepsilon }_{\max }\,﹩ produced by RICS (see Equation (17) and associated text). The dashed green curve in the  θ  f  = 15°  panel (top left) defines the RICS ﹩\,{\varepsilon }_{\max }\,﹩ for the general relativistic dipole configuration (p = 1). The filled black circles and diamonds label the locales on the field loops corresponding to an altitude equal to  10R NS  and  100R NS , respectively. In the bottom right panel are marker energies (purple dashed lines) indicating the approximate maximum observed energy in two magnetars with polar fields somewhat close to the illustrated values, SGR J1550–5408 (bursts, [b]) and AXP 4U 0142+61 (persistent emission, [p]); see Hu et al. (2019) for details concerning these observational indicators.
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: Left: polarization-averaged escape energies plotted as functions of emission colatitude  θ E  (note the logarithmic scale) for photons emitted parallel to the local field directions (Θ e  = 0°) from field loops with footpoint colatitudes  θ  f  = 1°  (solid) and  θ  f  = 5°  (dashed) for four different  p  values. As in prior figures, the black circles and diamonds mark the colatitudes where the emission altitude equals 10R NS  and 100R NS , respectively. The black dotted curve is the escape energy for the  p = 0.5  case calculated using the analytic formula in Equation (18), with  θ  f   adjusted to accommodate the increase of the field-line footpoint colatitude in curved spacetime. Right: escape energies for photons emitted perpendicular to the local field directions (Θ e  = 90° , outward directed, i.e., ﹩{\boldsymbol{k}}\propto {\boldsymbol{B}}\times \hat{\phi }﹩) from field loops anchored at  θ  f  = 1°  (solid) and  θ  f  = 5°  (dashed). The horizontal dashed line indicates the asymptotic escape energy (≈26 keV; see Equation (20) and the related text).
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: Sections of opaque volumes of polarization-averaged photon splitting (left panel) and pair creation (right panel) for photons with energy equal to 200 keV and 3 MeV, respectively. Photons are emitted in twisted magnetospheres in the Schwarzschild metric with  M = 1.44 M ⊙  and  R NS = 106  cm. In each panel, colored contours are plotted for photons emitted outward and perpendicular to local field directions (left half) or parallel to the field directions inside the meridional plane (right half), with  p = 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and  1.0 , as labeled, and generally ordered from lower to higher altitudes. All photon trajectories lie inside a meridional plane containing the star’s center. Photons emitted inside the contours are attenuated by photon splitting (left) or pair conversion (right). The shaded regions represent the opaque volumes for the outward emission with  p = 0.5  (blue) and for the parallel emission with  p = 1  (green), respectively. Photons emitted in these regions will be attenuated (τ > 1) before propagating to infinity or hitting the stellar surface. The dashed black curves define the boundaries of the shadow regions where emitted photons are on trajectories that will hit the surface; photons emitted in the gray interior shaded regions will hit the surface before being attenuated (τ < 1). Black curves with arrows signify photon paths for selected emission locales on different contours. Displayed magnetic field lines are projections onto the meridional plane; they are plotted in light blue (left,  p = 0.5) and light green (right,  p = 1 ; dipole).
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: Top panels: escape energies for photon splitting and pair creation for emission on twisted magnetic field loops,  p = 0.25,  0.5,  0.75,  and  1.0 , ordered from top to bottom as indicated in the legends. Here  B  p  = 100 , and emission is perpendicular to the local field (Θ e  = 90°). Solid curves address photons generally emitted outward (﹩{\boldsymbol{k}}\propto {\boldsymbol{B}}\times \hat{\phi }﹩, giving  ε esc,out), while the dashed curves therein display the escape energies for (a) inward-directed photons (﹩{\boldsymbol{k}}\propto \hat{\phi }\times {\boldsymbol{B}}﹩, giving  ε esc,in) on the left and (b) sideways emission cases (ε esc,side  for ﹩{\boldsymbol{k}}\propto [{\boldsymbol{B}}\times \hat{\phi }]\times {\boldsymbol{B}}﹩). The two bottom panels display the ratios  ε esc,in/ε esc,out  (left) and  ε esc,side/ε esc,out  (right). Again, heavyweight curves mark the colatitudes where attenuation is dominated by pair creation, and the black circles and diamonds mark the colatitudes where the radii equal 10R NS  and 100R NS , respectively.
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: Escape energies for photon splitting and pair creation for photons emitted from the stellar surface (dashed curves) or along twisted magnetic field loops (solid curves). Again, these are for  p = 0.25,  0.5,  0.75, and  1.0 , being ordered generally from top to bottom (or from outside to inside in the bottom left panel) as indicated in the panel legends. The surface polar field is now  B  p  = 10 , and emission is again parallel to the local field (Θ e  = 0°). Labels for points in all panels are identical to those in Figure 4, as are the observational data markers in the bottom right panel.
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: Polarization-averaged escape energies for photon splitting (solid curves) or pair creation (dashed curves) for photons emitted at points along twisted magnetic field loops with  p = 0.25,  0.5,  0.75,  and 1.0, ordered from top to bottom as indicated in the panel legends. The surface polar fields are  B  p  = 100  and  B  p  = 10  for the left and right panels, respectively. The footpoint colatitude  θ  f   of the field loops is fixed at 15°, and photons start their trajectories parallel to the local field ( Θ e  = 0°). The black circles and diamonds label the colatitudes where the emission altitude equals  10R NS  and  100R NS , respectively. Short horizontal lines on the right-hand side of each panel indicate the energies of 1 MeV and 100 keV.
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: The ratio of the escape energies (logarithmic scale) of photons emitted perpendicular to the local   B  direction (Θe = 90° ) to those emitted parallel to the field (Θe = 0°). These ratios are plotted as functions of the emission colatitude on field loops with a fixed footpoint colatitude of  θ  f  = 15° , for four different  p  values, as indicated. For the perpendicular emission, the initial photon momentum satisfied ﹩{\boldsymbol{k}}\propto {\boldsymbol{B}}\times \hat{\phi }﹩ (outward). The heavyweight portions of the curves represent the locales where the attenuation of outward emitted photons is dominated by pair creation. The black circles and diamonds label the colatitudes associated with radii equal to 10R NS  and 100R NS , respectively.
Paper: High-energy Photon Opacity in the Twisted Magnetospheres of Magnetars
Authors: Kun Hu, Matthew G. Baring, Alice K. Harding, Zorawar Wadiasingh
Figure caption: The ﹩\,{B}_{\hat{r}}﹩, ﹩\,{B}_{\hat{\theta }}﹩, and ﹩\,{B}_{\hat{\phi }}\,﹩ components (from left to right) of the magnetic field in the Schwarzschild metric’s LIF at the surface of a  1.44 M ⊙  neutron star of radius  R NS = 106  cm. They are plotted as functions of the magnetic colatitude ﹩\,\mu =\cos \theta \,﹩ with  p = 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and 1.0 (dark green, pure dipole case), ordered from top to bottom as indicated in the legends. The field component magnitudes are normalized by the field strength at the magnetic pole in the LIF, namely  B 0 ≈ 1.488B  p .
Paper: Neural Networks for Nuclear Reactions in MAESTROeX
Authors: Duoming Fan, Donald E. Willcox, Christopher DeGrendele, Michael Zingale, Andrew Nonaka
Figure caption: ResNet architectures for (a) single neural network and (b) parallel neural networks, where DNN1 has output of mass fractions X  k  and DNN2 nuclear energy generation e nuc. The solid lines represent standard ResNet shortcut connections while the dashed lines are additional connections.
Paper: Neural Networks for Nuclear Reactions in MAESTROeX
Authors: Duoming Fan, Donald E. Willcox, Christopher DeGrendele, Michael Zingale, Andrew Nonaka
Figure caption: Profile of species mass fractions, density, and temperature at initial time t = 0 (top row) and final time t = 12 μs (bottom row) for the planar case.
Paper: Neural Networks for Nuclear Reactions in MAESTROeX
Authors: Duoming Fan, Donald E. Willcox, Christopher DeGrendele, Michael Zingale, Andrew Nonaka
Figure caption: Profiles of species mass fractions, density, and temperature at t = 4.8 μs, the time starting from when the training data is generated.
Paper: Neural Networks for Nuclear Reactions in MAESTROeX
Authors: Duoming Fan, Donald E. Willcox, Christopher DeGrendele, Michael Zingale, Andrew Nonaka
Figure caption: Weights associated with the modified loss function of mass fractions. Note the symmetry around a mass fraction of 0.25.
Paper: Neural Networks for Nuclear Reactions in MAESTROeX
Authors: Duoming Fan, Donald E. Willcox, Christopher DeGrendele, Michael Zingale, Andrew Nonaka
Figure caption: Profile of mass fractions in negative inverse log form at t = 4.8 μs.
Paper: The Properties of Fast Yellow Pulsating Supergiants: FYPS Point the Way to Missing Red Supergiants
Authors: Trevor Z. Dorn-Wallenstein, Emily M. Levesque, James R. A. Davenport, Kathryn F. Neugent, Brett M. Morris, K. Azalee Bostroem
Figure caption: Left panels: the pulsator fraction f pulse shown as a function of location in the HR diagram, with f pulse increasing from blue to yellow. The stars in our sample are shown as white squares, with confirmed pulsators shown as blue stars with black outlines, FYPS (pulsators with ﹩\mathrm{log}L/{L}_{\odot }\geqslant 5.0﹩) shown as red stars, and the original five FYPS discovered by Dorn-Wallenstein et al. (2020) shown as red stars with black outlines. The typical uncertainty in ﹩\mathrm{log}{T}_{\mathrm{eff}}﹩ and ﹩\mathrm{log}L/{L}_{\odot }﹩ is shown as the black error bar in the top-left corner, and the region where our sample is incomplete is shown as the dark gray outline. The ﹩\mathrm{log}L/{L}_{\odot }\geqslant 5.0﹩ is shown as a dotted goldenrod line, the Cepheid instability strip is shown as a hatched, shaded region, and the region containing low-luminosity α Cygni variables is indicated by the periwinkle ellipse. Right panels: an estimate of the statistical significance of the structures seen in the left panels. The fraction of simulated f pulse values drawn from 10,000 bootstrap simulations whose value is less than the true value of f pulse, ﹩{f}_{\lt {f}_{\mathrm{pulse}}}﹩, with ﹩{f}_{\lt {f}_{\mathrm{pulse}}}﹩ increasing from red to blue. Regions in dark blue/red are statistically significant under/overdensities of pulsators. For comparison, we overplot Z = 0.006 evolutionary tracks from Eggenberger et al. (2021), the minimum FYPS luminosity at ﹩\mathrm{log}L/{L}_{\odot }\geqslant 5.0﹩ in goldenrod, and the maximum luminosity of a 17 and 21.3 M ⊙ star calculated using the relationship presented in Kochanek (2020) in dark and light blue respectively. The top panels show the results of this computation for the entire sample, with the middle and bottom panels showing the results restricted to the stars in the LMC and SMC, respectively.