The Mass–Concentration Relation and the Stellar-to-halo Mass Ratio in the CFHT Stripe 82 Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a new measurement of the mass–concentration relation and the stellar-to-halo mass ratio over the halo-mass range 5 × 1012 to 2 × 1014 M ⊙. To achieve this, we use weak lensing measurements from the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Stripe 82 Survey (CS82), combined with the central galaxies from the redMaPPer cluster catalog and the LOWZ/CMASS galaxy sample of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey Tenth Data Release. The stacked lensing signals around these samples are modeled as a sum of contributions from the central galaxy, its dark matter halo, and the neighboring halos, as well as a term for possible centering errors. We measure the mass–concentration relation: with A = 5.24 ± 1.24, B = −0.13 ± 0.10 for 0.2 < z < 0.4, and A = 6.61 ± 0.75, B = −0.15 ± 0.05 for 0.4 < z < 0.6. These amplitudes and slopes are completely consistent with predictions from recent simulations. We also measure the stellar-to-halo mass ratio for our samples, and find results consistent with previous measurements from lensing and other techniques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".