MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997771837 · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/204/2/21

EXTENDED PHOTOMETRY FOR THE DEEP2 GALAXY REDSHIFT SURVEY: A TESTBED FOR PHOTOMETRIC REDSHIFT EXPERIMENTS

2013· article· en· W1997771837 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel J. Matthews, Jeffrey A. Newman, Alison L. Coil, Michael C. Cooper, Stephen Gwyn

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)PhysicsRedshiftSkyAstrophysicsGalaxyAstronomyRedshift surveyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a new catalog that supplements the existing DEEP2 Galaxy Redshift Survey photometric and spectroscopic catalogs with ugriz photometry from two other surveys: the Canada–France–Hawaii Legacy Survey (CFHTLS) and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). Each catalog is cross-matched by position on the sky in order to assign ugriz photometry to objects in the DEEP2 catalogs. We have recalibrated the CFHTLS photometry where it overlaps DEEP2 in order to provide a more uniform data set. We have also used this improved photometry to predict DEEP2 BRI photometry in regions where only poorer measurements were available previously. In addition, we have included improved astrometry tied to SDSS rather than USNO-A2.0 for all DEEP2 objects. In total this catalog contains ∼27, 000 objects with full ugriz photometry as well as robust spectroscopic redshift measurements, 64% of which have r > 23. By combining the secure and accurate redshifts of the DEEP2 Galaxy Redshift Survey with ugriz photometry, we have created a catalog that can be used as an excellent testbed for future photo- z studies, including tests of algorithms for surveys such as LSST and DES.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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