MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971934398 · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/191/2/212

<i>SPITZER</i> MIPS 24 and 70 μm IMAGING NEAR THE SOUTH ECLIPTIC POLE: MAPS AND SOURCE CATALOGS

2010· article· en· W1971934398 on OpenAlexaff
K. S. Scott, Hans F. Stabenau, F. G. Braglia, C. Borys, Edward L. Chapin, Mark J. Devlin, G. Marsden, D. Scott, Matthew D. P. Truch, E. Valiante, M. Viero

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPoint sourcePhotometerSource countsAstrophysicsSkyAstronomyPhotometric redshiftGalaxyRedshiftOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have imaged an 11.5 deg 2 region of sky toward the South Ecliptic Pole (R.A. =04 h 43 m , decl. =−53°40', J2000) at 24 and 70 μm with MIPS, the Multiband Imaging Photometer for Spitzer . This region is coincident with a field mapped at longer wavelengths by AKARI and BLAST. We discuss our data reduction and source extraction procedures. The median 1σ depths of the maps are 47 μJy beam −1 at 24 μm and 4.3 mJy beam −1 at 70 μm. At 24 μm, we identify 93,098 point sources with signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) ⩾5 and an additional 63 resolved galaxies; at 70 μm we identify 891 point sources with S/N ⩾6. From simulations, we determine a false detection rate of 1.8% (1.1%) for the 24 μm (70 μm) catalog. The 24 and 70 μm point-source catalogs are 80% complete at 230 μJy and 11 mJy, respectively. These mosaic images and source catalogs will be available to the public through the NASA/IPAC Infrared Science Archive.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207