MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Lensing by galaxies in CNOC2 fields

2003· article· en· W2006236208 on OpenAlexaffabout
Henk Hoekstra, Marijn Franx, Konrad Kuijken, R. G. Carlberg, H. K. C. Yee

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyRedshiftWeak gravitational lensingCosmologyObservational cosmologyAstronomyField galaxyRedshift surveyTelescopeGalaxy formation and evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have observed two blank fields of approximately 30 × 23 arcmin2 using the William Herschel Telescope. The fields have been studied as part of the Canadian Network for Observational Cosmology Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (CNOC2), and spectroscopic redshifts are available for 1125 galaxies in the two fields. We measured the lensing signal caused by large-scale structure, and found that the result is consistent with current, more accurate measurements. We study the galaxy—galaxy lensing signal of three overlapping samples of lenses (one with and two without redshift information), and detect a significant signal in all cases. The estimates for the velocity dispersion of an galaxy agree well for the various samples. The best-fitting singular isothermal sphere model to the ensemble-averaged tangential distortion around the galaxies with redshifts yields a velocity dispersion of σ*= 130+15−17 km s−1, or a circular velocity of V*c= 184+22−25 km s−1 for an L*B galaxy, in good agreement with other studies. We use a maximum-likelihood analysis, where a parametrized mass model is compared with the data, to study the extent of galaxy dark matter haloes. Making use of all available data, we find σ*= 111 ± 12 km s−1 (68.3 per cent confidence, marginalized over the truncation parameter s) for a truncated isothermal sphere model in which all galaxies have the same mass-to-light ratio. The value of the truncation parameter s is not constrained that well, and we find s*= 260+124−73h−1 kpc (68.3 per cent confidence, marginalized over σ*), with a 99.7 per cent confidence lower limit of 80 h−1 kpc. Interestingly, our results provide a 95 per cent confidence upper limit of 556 h−1 kpc. The galaxy—galaxy lensing analysis allows us to estimate the average mass-to-light ratio of the field, which can be used to estimate Ωm. The current result, however, depends strongly on the assumed scaling relation for s.

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)0.004
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 score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations65
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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