MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1810871270 · doi:10.1086/344945

A Feature at [CLC][ITAL]z[/ITAL][/CLC] ∼ 3.2 in the Evolution of the L[CLC]y[/CLC]α Forest Optical Depth

2003· article· en· W1810871270 on OpenAlexaff
Mariangela Bernardi, Ravi K. Sheth, Mark SubbaRao, Gordon T. Richards, Scott Burles, Andrew J. Connolly, Joshua A. Frieman, R. C. Nichol, Joop Schaye, Donald P. Schneider, D. E. vanden Berk, Donald G. York, J. Brinkmann, D. Q. Lamb

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsApache (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReionizationScalingAstrophysicsRedshiftPhysicsFeature (linguistics)Spectral lineRange (aeronautics)Flux (metallurgy)ChemistryMaterials scienceAstronomyMathematicsGeometryGalaxyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effective optical depth in the Ly-alpha forest region of 1061 low-resolution QSO spectra drawn from the SDSS database decreases with decreasing redshift over the range 2.5 < z < 4. Although the evolution is relatively smooth, tau_eff ~ (1+z)^{3.8 pm 0.2}, at z ~ 3.2 the effective optical depth decreases suddenly, by about ten percent with respect to this smoother evolution. It climbs back to the original smooth scaling again by z ~ 2.9. We describe two techniques, one of which is new, for quantifying this evolution which give consistent results. A variety of tests show that the feature is not likely to be a consequence of how the QSO sample was selected, nor the result of flux calibration or other systematic effects. Other authors have argued that, at this same epoch, the temperature of the IGM also shows a departure from an otherwise smooth decrease with time. These features in the evolution of the temperature and the optical depth are signatures of the reionization of He II.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations92
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207