adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Switchbacks and Associated Magnetic Holes Observed near the Alfvén Critical Surface
Authors: Anthony P. Rasca, William M. Farrell, Jacob R. Gruesbeck, Robert J. MacDowall, Stuart D. Bale, Justin C. Kasper
Figure caption: (a) An example of a step-like switchback boundary in B  r  (blue) from PSP’s first encounter, E1, with an associated ∣B∣ dropout/MH in ∣B∣ (black) at the switchback entrance at t = 0. (b) This boundary was found to also have an associated intensification in the f pe emission in the LFR radio spectrogram, indicated by the intense brightening at the electron plasma frequency along the QTN, and an enhanced electron flow (Rasca et al. 2022).
Paper: Switchbacks and Associated Magnetic Holes Observed near the Alfvén Critical Surface
Authors: Anthony P. Rasca, William M. Farrell, Jacob R. Gruesbeck, Robert J. MacDowall, Stuart D. Bale, Justin C. Kasper
Figure caption: The change in ∣B∣ as a function of time for E8 (left) and E12 (right) normalized by 1 minute means. (a) and (b) All points for decimated 1 s intervals color coded for P1–P3 and the sub-Alfvénic region during E8 and the super-Alfvénic switchback patch and sub-Alfvénic region for E12. (c) and (d) All points corresponding to an SBI > 3000 nT km s−1. (e) and (f) All points corresponding to switchback boundaries used in the E8 and E12 superposed epoch analyses.
Paper: Switchbacks and Associated Magnetic Holes Observed near the Alfvén Critical Surface
Authors: Anthony P. Rasca, William M. Farrell, Jacob R. Gruesbeck, Robert J. MacDowall, Stuart D. Bale, Justin C. Kasper
Figure caption: Co-added magnetic field and ion velocity profiles generated using a superposed epoch analysis by Farrell et al. (2020). Left: superposed switchback entries at t = 0 for B  r , V  r , and ∣B∣. Right: superposed switchback exits at t = 0 for B  r , V  r , and ∣B∣. The mean change in each measurement at the switchback boundaries is indicated. Brief abrupt decreases in ∣B∣ (i.e., MHs) at the boundary occur frequently enough to appear in the co-added profiles.
Paper: Switchbacks and Associated Magnetic Holes Observed near the Alfvén Critical Surface
Authors: Anthony P. Rasca, William M. Farrell, Jacob R. Gruesbeck, Robert J. MacDowall, Stuart D. Bale, Justin C. Kasper
Figure caption: SBI for the corresponding E8 (left) and E12 (right) timespans from Figure 4. SBI thresholds are used to define switchback boundary sample sets for each encounter. The direction of the SBI spikes corresponds to PSP being below (negative) or above (positive) the heliospheric current sheet. A threshold of an SBI > 3000 nT km s−1 is used for E8, while a threshold of an SBI > 12,000 nT km s−1 is used for E12.
Paper: Switchbacks and Associated Magnetic Holes Observed near the Alfvén Critical Surface
Authors: Anthony P. Rasca, William M. Farrell, Jacob R. Gruesbeck, Robert J. MacDowall, Stuart D. Bale, Justin C. Kasper
Figure caption: Co-added B  r , V  r , and ∣B∣ profiles for the E12 superposed epoch analyses on switchback boundary sample populations from the super-Alfvénic patch and sub-Alfvénic region. As with Figure 6, the top panels correspond to switchback entries and the bottom panels to switchback exits. Like with E8, deep, boundary-associated MHs do not occur frequently enough the appear in the co-added ∣B∣ profiles during the sub-Alfvénic region.
Paper: Switchbacks and Associated Magnetic Holes Observed near the Alfvén Critical Surface
Authors: Anthony P. Rasca, William M. Farrell, Jacob R. Gruesbeck, Robert J. MacDowall, Stuart D. Bale, Justin C. Kasper
Figure caption: An example of a boundary-unassociated MH in ∣B∣ (black) during PSP’s E4 encounter. This MH differs from MHs discussed prior by occurring in the middle of the switchback in B  r  (blue), as opposed to at or near the switchback boundaries.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The Toomre’s Q parameter (top, face-on view) and number density (bottom, edge-on slice) on the scale of the circumbinary disk at Δt = 10,000 yr for the intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case. The dashed contours in the upper panel indicate Q = 1, below which the disk is gravitationally unstable. The positions of the sink particles are indicated with open circles.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The time sequence of initial turbulent fragmentation (Δt = 37 yr, top), subsequent disk formation (Δt = 2000 yr, bottom), and just before the merger of the inner binary induced by a star in the outer orbit (Δt = 18,000 yr) in the high-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case. The column density distribution is shown in the face-on view. We also show the projected positions of the sink particles with their IDs. At the epoch of the top panel, the fragment labeled with “(S3)” is yet to be converted into a sink particle. The secondary protostar, S2, in the first epoch merges with the primary, S1, and disappears before the second epoch. In the bottom panel, we show the trajectories of protostars in the frame where their barycenter is fixed. The inner binary later merges due to angular momentum extraction by the outer protostar. The axis perpendicular to each image plane is fixed in the same direction.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The relation between the angular momentum of the binary orbits, L orb, and the corresponding initial enclosed angular momentum of gas clouds, J enc. The binary’s orbital angular momentum and total mass are evaluated at Δt = 30,000 yr, before stellar radiative feedback drives orbital evolution. The initial enclosed angular momentum J enc is calculated for the radius R enc, whose enclosed mass is equal to the total mass M tot, i.e., ﹩{J}_{\mathrm{enc}}\equiv {J}_{\lt {R}_{\mathrm{enc}}}﹩ with R enc satisfying ﹩{M}_{\lt {R}_{\mathrm{enc}}}={M}_{\mathrm{tot}}﹩. The plotted points correspond to the low-﹩\dot{M},﹩ intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩, and high-﹩\dot{M}﹩ cases from left to right.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: Dependence of protostellar evolution on the prescription of radiative feedback. From top to bottom, we plot the total mass M tot, the number of surviving sinks N sink, and the number of sinks formed N form. The line types indicate the runs: the fiducial run with both EUV and FUV (blue solid), the FUV-only run (orange dotted–dashed lines), and the run without radiation (green-dashed lines).
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The density distribution of the circumstellar disk before (Δt = 18,000 yr, top) and after (Δt = 30,000 yr, bottom) fragmentation, which leads to mini-triplet formation in the intermediate-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case. The gas distribution is shown as a face-on slice together with the sink particles marked by filled circles. In the lower panel, the trajectories of the satellites are overplotted, in the frame where the barycenter of the inner two protostars is fixed, with the masses of the protostars indicated in M ⊙.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The density-temperature phase diagram in the fiducial run with both EUV and FUV (left), the FUV-only run (middle), and the run without radiation (right). We take the data when M tot ≈ 130 M ⊙ in all the runs (Δt = 30,000 yr in the first two runs and Δt = 15,000 yr in the last run). The color indicates the mass in the top row and the H2 fraction in the bottom row. In the bottom row, hatched is the region where the gas is ionized (y(H+) > 0.5).
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The relation between the final total stellar mass, M tot, and the initial cloud-scale accretion rate, ﹩{\dot{M}}_{\mathrm{cloud}}﹩. We plot the data from our 3D AMR simulations (blue), along with previous 3D spherical grid simulations (H16, orange), and previous 2D simulations (Hirano et al. 2014, purple). The 2D data points are denoted by small symbols, except for those re-examined by 3D spherical grid simulations. The dashed line shows the relation proposed by Hirano et al. (2015) based on the 2D results (Equation (13)).
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: Trajectories of protostars before (Δt = 10,000 yr, top) and after (Δt = 17,000 yr, bottom) merger in the low-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case. We plot trajectories on the background of a white-shaded density map. Three-body interaction induces the merger, leading to the formation of an eccentric binary. The white cross in the upper panel indicates the point of merger.
Paper: Formation of Massive and Wide First-star Binaries in Radiation Hydrodynamic Simulations
Authors: Kazuyuki Sugimura, Tomoaki Matsumoto, Takashi Hosokawa, Shingo Hirano, Kazuyuki Omukai
Figure caption: The external photoevaporation event shown as a time sequence in the low-﹩\dot{M}﹩ case. From top to bottom, we show the gas (blue to red) and the ionization front (yellow) at the epochs of 0, 1000, 3000, and 10,000 yr after Δt = 64,000 yr, when the left protostar begins to completely photoevaporate its own disk from inside.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Distribution of GWB spectrum parameters (γ GWB, ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}{A}_{0.1{\mathrm{yr}}^{-1}}﹩) based on a CURN analysis, and S/N and ﹩{\mathrm{log}}_{10}f﹩ of the highest-S/N CW source in each realization. The red lines represent the values reported in Agazie et al. (2023a) based on the NANOGrav 15 yr data set. We also indicate the Pearson correlation coefficient for every pair where the associated p-value is below 10−3.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Distribution of GWB parameters under the CURN (red), HD (orange), CURN+CW (black), and HD+CW (blue) models for a particular realization with a clearly detectable binary (S/N = 6.2). Not modeling the CW signal biases the spectral slope low while, when we include it, we recover the expected γ = 13/3 value. Note that in this particular example, the CURN and HD models show very similar posteriors, while the spectral recovery is slightly different between the CURN+CW and HD+CW models.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Distribution of mean OS S/Ns, HD vs. CURN BFs, and recovered GWB amplitude referenced at f = 0.1yr−1. The gray lines represent zero S/Ns and unit BFs, and the red lines represent the values reported in Agazie et al. (2023a) based on the NANOGrav 15 yr data set. We also indicate the Pearson correlation coefficient for every pair where the associated p-value is below 10−3.
Paper: How to Detect an Astrophysical Nanohertz Gravitational Wave Background
Authors: Bence Bécsy, Neil J. Cornish, Patrick M. Meyers, Luke Zoltan Kelley, Gabriella Agazie, Akash Anumarlapudi, Anne M. Archibald, Zaven Arzoumanian, Paul T. Baker, Laura Blecha, Adam Brazier, Paul R. Brook, Sarah Burke-Spolaor, J. Andrew Casey-Clyde, Maria Charisi, Shami Chatterjee, Katerina Chatziioannou, Tyler Cohen, James M. Cordes, Fronefield Crawford, H. Thankful Cromartie, Kathryn Crowter, Megan E. DeCesar, Paul B. Demorest, Timothy Dolch, Elizabeth C. Ferrara, William Fiore, Emmanuel Fonseca, Gabriel E. Freedman, Nate Garver-Daniels, Peter A. Gentile, Joseph Glaser, Deborah C. Good, Kayhan Gültekin, Jeffrey S. Hazboun, Sophie Hourihane, Ross J. Jennings, Aaron D. Johnson, Megan L. Jones, Andrew R. Kaiser, David L. Kaplan, Matthew Kerr, Joey S. Key, Nima Laal, Michael T. Lam, William G. Lamb, T. Joseph W. Lazio, Natalia Lewandowska, Tyson B. Littenberg, Tingting Liu, Duncan R. Lorimer, Jing Luo, Ryan S. Lynch, Chung-Pei Ma, Dustin R. Madison, Alexander McEwen, James W. McKee, Maura A. McLaughlin, Natasha McMann, Bradley W. Meyers, Chiara M. F. Mingarelli, Andrea Mitridate, Cherry Ng, David J. Nice, Stella Koch Ocker, Ken D. Olum, Timothy T. Pennucci, Benetge B. P. Perera, Nihan S. Pol, Henri A. Radovan, Scott M. Ransom, Paul S. Ray, Joseph D. Romano, Shashwat C. Sardesai, Ann Schmiedekamp, Carl Schmiedekamp, Kai Schmitz, Brent J. Shapiro-Albert, Xavier Siemens, Joseph Simon, Magdalena S. Siwek, Sophia V. Sosa Fiscella, Ingrid H. Stairs, Daniel R. Stinebring, Kevin Stovall, Abhimanyu Susobhanan, Joseph K. Swiggum, Stephen R. Taylor, Jacob E. Turner, Caner Unal, Michele Vallisneri, Rutger van Haasteren, Sarah J. Vigeland, Haley M. Wahl, Caitlin A. Witt, Olivia Young
Figure caption: Distribution of the CW parameters for a particular realization from a CURN+CW analysis (black) and those that were reweighted to HD+CW (blue). The red lines represent the true parameter values.
Paper: Investigation of Emission States of PSR J1722–3207
Authors: D. Zhao, W. M. Yan, N. Wang, J. P. Yuan
Figure caption: Polarization profiles for the average of all pulses (left), the strong-state pulses (middle), and the weak-state pulses (right). The black, red, and blue lines in the lower panel represent the total intensity, linearly polarized intensity, and circularly polarized intensity, respectively. All profiles here have been normalized by the peak intensity of the average pulse profile. The black dots with error bars in the upper panels indicate the PA of the linearly polarized emission.
Paper: Investigation of Emission States of PSR J1722–3207
Authors: D. Zhao, W. M. Yan, N. Wang, J. P. Yuan
Figure caption: Estimates of the jitter noise in PSR J1722−3207. Upper panel: the rms residuals vs. the averaged number of pulses N  p  (squares), and the average TOA uncertainties vs. N  p  (circles). Lower panel: the variations for σ  J (N  p ) vs. N  p .
Paper: Investigation of Emission States of PSR J1722–3207
Authors: D. Zhao, W. M. Yan, N. Wang, J. P. Yuan
Figure caption: Comparison of the average profile for pulses in the strong state and the weak state. As Figure 1 shows, the three vertical dashed lines are used to distinguish the leading component and the trailing component.
Paper: Investigation of Emission States of PSR J1722–3207
Authors: D. Zhao, W. M. Yan, N. Wang, J. P. Yuan
Figure caption: Timing residuals for the average pulse profiles formed by bright pulses with S/N > 10 (red dots), and all the pulses together (black dots). The bars are the TOA uncertainties. The weighted rms residuals are presented in the figure legend.
Paper: Investigation of Emission States of PSR J1722–3207
Authors: D. Zhao, W. M. Yan, N. Wang, J. P. Yuan
Figure caption: Total intensity profiles (solid lines) for two individual pulses of PSR J1722−3207 with the highest peak S/N. As a comparison, the mean pulse profile (dashed lines) is also shown in each panel.
Paper: Identifying the Physical Origin of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Supervised Machine Learning
Authors: Jia-Wei Luo, Fei-Fei Wang, Jia-Ming Zhu-Ge, Ye Li, Yuan-Chuan Zou, Bing Zhang
Figure caption: Examples of confusion matrices and SHAP feature importance values of the prompt emission subgroup.
Paper: Identifying the Physical Origin of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Supervised Machine Learning
Authors: Jia-Wei Luo, Fei-Fei Wang, Jia-Ming Zhu-Ge, Ye Li, Yuan-Chuan Zou, Bing Zhang
Figure caption: Examples of confusion matrices and SHAP feature importance values of the prompt emission subgroup without T 90, F_g, or HR.
Paper: Identifying the Physical Origin of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Supervised Machine Learning
Authors: Jia-Wei Luo, Fei-Fei Wang, Jia-Ming Zhu-Ge, Ye Li, Yuan-Chuan Zou, Bing Zhang
Figure caption: Examples of confusion matrices and SHAP feature importance values of the prompt emission subgroup without T 90.
Paper: Identifying the Physical Origin of Gamma-Ray Bursts with Supervised Machine Learning
Authors: Jia-Wei Luo, Fei-Fei Wang, Jia-Ming Zhu-Ge, Ye Li, Yuan-Chuan Zou, Bing Zhang
Figure caption: Examples of confusion matrices and SHAP feature importance values of the afterglow subgroup.
Paper: Rapid Localization of Gravitational Wave Sources from Compact Binary Coalescences Using Deep Learning
Authors: Chayan Chatterjee, Manoj Kovalam, Linqing Wen, Damon Beveridge, Foivos Diakogiannis, Kevin Vinsen
Figure caption: Upper panels (a)–(c) show densities of the areas of the 90% credible intervals, 50% credible intervals, and searched areas, respectively, for our BBH injection set, obtained using GW-SkyLocator (blue) and BAYESTAR (orange). Middle panels (d)–(f) show the densities of the 90% credible interval areas, 50% credible interval areas, and searched areas for BNS samples. Bottom panels (g)–(i) show the same for NSBH injections.
Paper: Rapid Localization of Gravitational Wave Sources from Compact Binary Coalescences Using Deep Learning
Authors: Chayan Chatterjee, Manoj Kovalam, Linqing Wen, Damon Beveridge, Foivos Diakogiannis, Kevin Vinsen
Figure caption: A BNS waveform, the strain signal obtained after injecting the waveform in noise, and the corresponding S/N time series obtained by matched filtering the strain with the optimal waveform template are shown. Top panel: the whitened GW strain signal corresponding to a BNS merger is plotted in blue. These data were obtained after injecting the GW waveform (rescaled amplitude shown in orange) into stationary Gaussian noise colored by advanced LIGO PSD. Bottom panel: the optimal S/N time series obtained by matched filtering the GW strain with the signal template shown in the above panel.
Paper: Rapid Localization of Gravitational Wave Sources from Compact Binary Coalescences Using Deep Learning
Authors: Chayan Chatterjee, Manoj Kovalam, Linqing Wen, Damon Beveridge, Foivos Diakogiannis, Kevin Vinsen
Figure caption: Sky maps of three-detector (upper panel) and two-detector (bottom panel) BBH, BNS, and NSBH (bottom panel) injections generated by GW-SkyLocator. The heat maps show the probability density obtained from  GW-SkyLocator  with the 90% and 50% credible intervals shown in blue and green, respectively. The white contours show the 90% and 50% credible regions obtained from BAYESTAR. The blue marker shows the true sky coordinates of the injections. The areas of the 90% and 50% credible regions from GW-SkyLocator are shown in the inset.