The Canada–United Kingdom Deep Submillimeter Survey. V. The Submillimeter Properties of Lyman Break Galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have used 850 μm maps obtained as part of the Canada-UK Deep Submillimeter Survey (CUDSS) to investigate the submillimeter properties of Lyman break galaxies (LBGs). We used three samples of LBGs: two from the Canada-France Deep Fields (CFDF) survey covering CUDSS 14 and CUDSS 03, and one from Steidel and collaborators also covering CUDSS 14. We measure a mean flux from both CFDF LBG samples at a level of ~2 σ of 0.414 ± 0.263 mJy for CUDSS 03 and 0.382 ± 0.206 mJy for CUDSS 14, but the Steidel et al. sample is consistent with zero flux. From this we place upper limits on the Lyman break contribution to the 850 μm background of ~20%. We have also measured the cross-clustering between the LBGs and the SCUBA sources. From this measurement we infer a large clustering amplitude of r 0 = 11.5 ± 3.0 ± 3.0 h -1 Mpc for the Steidel et al. sample (where the first error is statistical and the second systematic), r 0 = 4.5 ± 7.0 ± 5.0 h -1 Mpc for CFDF 14, and r 0 = 7.5 ± 7.0 ± 5.0 h -1 Mpc for CFDF 03. The Steidel et al. sample, for which we have the most significant detection of clustering, is also the largest of the three samples and has spectroscopically confirmed redshifts
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".