MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1987860029 · doi:10.1086/587136

AEGIS: Radio and Mid‐Infrared Selection of Obscured AGN Candidates

2008· article· en· W1987860029 on OpenAlexaff
S. Q. Park, P. Barmby, G. G. Fazio, K. Nandra, E. S. Laird, A. Georgakakis, D. J. Rosario, S. Willner, G. H. Rieke, M. L. N. Ashby, R. J. Ivison, Alison L. Coil, Satoshi Miyazaki

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive galactic nucleusAstrophysicsObservatoryPhysicsInfraredSpitzer Space TelescopeTelescopeMid infraredSelection (genetic algorithm)AstronomyWavelengthGalaxyComputer scienceOpticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of multiwavelength selection techniques is crucial for discovering a complete and unbiased set of active galactic nuclei (AGNs). Here, we select a sample of 72 AGN candidates in the extended Groth strip (EGS) using deep radio and mid-infrared (mid-IR) data from the Very Large Array (VLA) and the Spitzer Space Telescope , and analyze their properties across other wavelengths. Only 30% of these sources are detected in deep 200 ks Chandra X-Ray Observatory pointings. The X-ray-detected sources demonstrate moderate obscuration with column densities of N H ≳ 10 22 cm −2 . A stacked image of sources undetected by Chandra shows low levels of X-ray activity, suggesting they may be faint or obscured AGNs. Less than 40% of our sample are selected as AGNs with optical broad lines, mid-IR power laws, or X-ray detections. Thus, if our candidates are indeed AGNs, then the radio/mid-IR selection criteria we use provide a powerful tool for identifying sources missed by other surveys.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations35
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→