MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2000627331 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/692/2/1561

<i>SPITZER</i>OBSERVATIONS OF EXTENDED LYMAN-α CLOUDS IN THE SSA22 FIELD

2009· article· en· W2000627331 on OpenAlexaff
Tracy Webb, Tōru Yamada, Jiasheng Huang, M. L. N. Ashby, Yuichi Matsuda, Eiichi Egami, Marjorie Gonzalez, T. Hayashimo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyStar formationAstronomyQSOSHaloPopulationActive galactic nucleusQuasar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a Spitzer IRAC and MIPS 24 μm study of extended Lyman-α clouds (or Lyman-α Blobs, LABs) within the SSA22 filamentary structure at z = 3.09. We detect 6/26 LABs in all IRAC filters, four of which are also detected at 24 μm, and find good correspondence with the 850 μm measurements of Geach et al. An analysis of the rest-frame ultraviolet, optical, near- and mid-infrared colors reveals that these six systems exhibit signs of nuclear activity (active galactic nucleus (AGN)) and/or extreme star formation. Notably, they have properties that bridge galaxies dominated by star formation (Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs)) and those with AGNs (LBGs classified as QSOs). The LAB systems not detected in all four IRAC bands, on the other hand, are, as a group, consistent with pure star-forming systems, similar to the majority of the LBGs within the filament. These results indicate that the galaxies within LABs do not comprise a homogeneous population, though they are also consistent with scenarios in which the gas halos are ionized through a common mechanism such as galaxy-scale winds driven by the galaxies within them, or gravitational heating of the collapsing cloud itself.

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations48
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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