4.6 Article

FREQUENCY DEPENDENCE OF PULSE WIDTH FOR 150 RADIO NORMAL PULSARS

期刊

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0067-0049/215/1/11

关键词

methods: statistical; pulsars: general; radiation mechanisms: non-thermal

资金

  1. Chinese Scholarship Council [201308440093]
  2. NSFC key project [11178001]
  3. Yuncheng University [YQ-2011033]
  4. WLFC [XBBS201422]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The frequency dependence of the pulse width is studied for 150 normal pulsars, mostly selected from the European Pulsar Network, for which the 10% multifrequency pulse widths can be well fit with the Thorsett relationship W-10 = A nu(mu) + W-10,W-min. The relative fraction of pulse width change between 0.4 GHz and 4.85 GHz, eta = (W-4.85 - W-0.4)/W-0.4, is calculated in terms of the best-fit relationship for each pulsar. It is found that 81 pulsars (54%) have eta < -10% (group A), showing considerable profile narrowing at high frequencies, 40 pulsars (27%) have -10% <= eta <= 10% (group B), meaning a marginal change in pulse width, and 29 pulsars (19%) have eta > 10% (group C), showing a remarkable profile broadening at high frequencies. The fractions of the group-A and group-C pulsars suggest that the profile narrowing phenomenon at high frequencies is more common than the profile broadening phenomenon, but a large fraction of the group-B and group-C pulsars (a total of 46%) is also revealed. The group-C pulsars, together with a portion of group-B pulsars with slight pulse broadening, can hardly be explained using the conventional radius-to-frequency mapping, which only applies to the profile narrowing phenomenon. Based on a recent version of the fan beam model, a type of broadband emission model, we propose that the diverse frequency dependence of pulse width is a consequence of different types of distribution of emission spectra across the emission region. The geometrical effect predicting a link between the emission beam shrinkage and spectrum steepening is tested but disfavored.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据