Paper detail

On the Relaxation Behaviors of Slow and Classical Glitches: Observational Biases and Their Opposite Recovery Trends

We study the pulsar timing properties and the data analysis methods during glitch recoveries. In some cases one first fits the time-of-arrivals (TOAs) to obtain the "time-averaged" frequency $ν$ and its first derivative $\dotν$, and then fits models to them. However, our simulations show that $ν$ and $\dotν$ obtained this way are systematically biased, unless the time intervals between the nearby data points of TOAs are smaller than about $10^4$ s, which is much shorter than typical observation intervals. Alternatively, glitch parameters can be obtained by fitting the phases directly with relatively smaller biases; but the initial recovery timescale is usually chosen by eyes, which may introduce a strong bias. We also construct a phenomenological model by assuming a pulsar's spin-down law of $\dotνν^{-3} =-H_0 G(t)$ with $G(t)=1+κe^{-t/τ}$ for a glitch recovery, where $H_0$ is a constant and $κ$ and $τ$ are the glitch parameters to be found. This model can reproduce the observed data of slow glitches from B1822--09 and a giant classical glitch of B2334+61, with $κ<0$ or $κ>0$, respectively. We then use this model to simulate TOA data and test several fitting procedures for a glitch recovery. The best procedure is: 1) use a very high order polynomial (e.g. to 50th order) to precisely describe the phase; 2) then obtain $ν(t)$ and $\dotν(t)$ from the polynomial; and 3) the glitch parameters are obtained from $ν(t)$ or $\dotν(t)$. Finally, the uncertainty in the starting time $t_0$ of a classical glitch causes uncertainties to some glitch parameters, but less so to a slow glitch and $t_0$ of which can be determined from data.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.