MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

LEMOMAF: Lensed Mock Map Facility

2007· article· en· W1993735920 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisWeak gravitational lensingRedshiftGalaxyConvergence (economics)Photometric redshiftPoint spread functionWavelength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the Lensed Mock Map Facility (lemomaf), a tool designed to perform mock weak-lensing measurements on numerically simulated chunks of the Universe. Coupling N-body simulations to a semi-analytical model of galaxy formation, lemomaf can create realistic lensed images and mock catalogues of galaxies, at wavelengths ranging from the ultraviolet to the submillimetre. To demonstrate the power of such a tool, we compute predictions of the source–lens clustering (SLC) effect on the convergence statistics, and quantify the impact of weak lensing on galaxy counts in two different filters. We find that the SLC effect skews the probability density function of the convergence towards low values, with an intensity which strongly depends on the redshift distribution of galaxies. On the other hand, the degree of enhancement or depletion in galaxy counts due to weak lensing is independent of the SLC effect. We discuss the impact on the two-point shear statistics to be measured by future missions like SNAP and LSST. The SLC effect would bias the estimation of σ8 from two-point statistics up to 5 per cent for a narrow redshift distribution of mean z∼ 0.5, and up to 2 per cent in small angular scales for a redshift distribution of mean z∼ 1.5. We conclude that accurate photometric redshifts for individual galaxies are necessary in order to quantify and isolate the SLC effect.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.009

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 head0.199
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→