MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965774928 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/145/6/164

THE LICK-INDEX CALIBRATION OF THE GEMINI MULTI-OBJECT SPECTROGRAPHS

2013· article· en· W1965774928 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas H. Puzia, Bryan W. Miller, Gelys Trancho, B. Basarab, Jordan Mirocha, Karen A. Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrismBalmer seriesCalibrationPhysicsOpticsAstrophysicsLine (geometry)Stellar populationSpectral lineEmission spectrumAstronomyGalaxyMathematicsRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the calibration of the spectroscopic Lick/IDS standard line-index system for measurements obtained with the Gemini Multi-Object Spectrographs known as GMOS-North and GMOS-South. We provide linear correction functions for each of the 25 standard Lick line indices for the B600 grism and two instrumental setups, one with 0 5 slit width and 1 × 1 CCD pixel binning (corresponding to ∼2.5 Å spectral resolution) and the other with 0 75 slit width and 2 × 2 binning (∼4 Å). We find small and well-defined correction terms for the set of Balmer indices Hβ, Hγ A , and Hδ A along with the metallicity sensitive indices Fe5015, Fe5270, Fe5335, Fe5406, Mg 2 , and Mg b that are widely used for stellar population diagnostics of distant stellar systems. We find other indices that sample molecular absorption bands, such as TiO 1 and TiO 2 , with very wide wavelength coverage or indices that sample very weak molecular and atomic absorption features, such as Mg 1 , as well as indices with particularly narrow passband definitions, such as Fe4384, Ca4455, Fe4531, Ca4227, and Fe5782, which are less robustly calibrated. These indices should be used with caution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207