MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000338645 · doi:10.1086/426536

Simulating the<i>Spitzer</i>Mid‐Infrared Color‐Color Diagrams

2005· article· en· W2000338645 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Sajina, Mark Lacy, D. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyAstrophysicsPhysicsRedshiftInfraredAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use a simple parameterization of the mid-IR spectra of a wide range of galaxy types in order to predict their distribution in the Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) 3.6, 4.5, 5.8, and 8.0 μm and Multiband Photometer for Spitzer 24 μm color-color diagrams. We distinguish three basic spectral types by the energetically dominant component in the 3-12 μm regime: stellar-dominated, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-dominated, and continuum-dominated. We use a Markov chain Monte Carlo approach to arrive at a more systematic and robust representation of the mid-IR spectra of galaxies than do more traditional approaches. We find that IRAC color-color plots are well suited to distinguishing the above spectral types, while the addition of 24 μm data allows us to suggest practical three-color cuts that preferentially select higher redshift sources of a specific type. We compare our simulations with the color-color plot obtained by the Spitzer First Look Survey and find reasonable agreement. Lastly, we discuss other applications as well as future directions for this work.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations94
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207