Planck 2015 results VII. High Frequency Instrument data processing: time-ordered information and beams
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Planck High Frequency Instrument (HFI) has observed the full sky at \nsix frequencies (100, 143, 217, 353, 545, and 857 GHz) in intensity and \nat four frequencies in linear polarization (100, 143, 217, and 353 GHz). \nIn order to obtain sky maps, the time-ordered information (TOI) \ncontaining the detector and pointing samples must be processed and the \nangular response must be assessed. The full mission TOI is included in \nthe Planck 2015 release. This paper describes the HFI TOI and beam \nprocessing for the 2015 release. HFI calibration and map making are \ndescribed in a companion paper. The main pipeline has been modified \nsince the last release (2013 nominal mission in intensity only), by \nincluding a correction for the nonlinearity of the warm readout and by \nimproving the model of the bolometer time response. The beam processing \nis an essential tool that derives the angular response used in all the \nPlanck science papers and we report an improvement in the effective beam \nwindow function uncertainty of more than a factor of 10 relative to the \n2013 release. Noise correlations introduced by pipeline filtering \nfunction are assessed using dedicated simulations. Angular cross-power \nspectra using data sets that are decorrelated in time are immune to the \nmain systematic effects.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it