MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1946256855 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201526061

OmegaWINGS: OmegaCAM-VST observations of WINGS galaxy clusters

2015· article· en· W1946256855 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceYork UniversityCarnegie Mellon UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityHarvard UniversityOhio State UniversityUniversity of ArizonaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyPrinceton UniversityNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of PortsmouthVanderbilt UniversityYale UniversityBrookhaven National LaboratoryCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)Galaxy clusterGalaxyRedshiftGalaxy groups and clustersType-cD galaxyField (mathematics)Field galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. Wide-field observations targeting galaxy clusters at low redshift are complementary to field surveys and provide the local benchmark for detailed studies of the most massive haloes in the local Universe. The Wide-field Nearby Galaxy-cluster Survey (WINGS) is a wide-field multi-wavelength survey of X-ray selected clusters at z = 0.04–0.07. The original 34′ × 34′ WINGS field of view has now been extended to cover a 1 deg2 field with both photometry and spectroscopy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations97
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207