MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008218714 · doi:10.1086/430168

Imaging of SDSS<i>z</i>&gt; 6 Quasar Fields: Gravitational Lensing, Companion Galaxies, and the Host Dark Matter Halos

2005· article· en· W2008218714 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuasarDark matterHaloGravitationDark matter haloScalar field dark matterGravitational lensDark galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have undertaken deep optical imaging observations of three 6.2 < z < 6.5 quasar fields in the i ' and z ' filters. These data are used to search for foreground galaxies that are gravitationally lensing the quasars and distant galaxies physically associated with the quasars. Foreground galaxies are found closer than 5'' to the lines of sight of two of the three quasars. However, the faintness of these galaxies suggests that they have fairly low masses and provide only weak magnifications (μ ≲ 1.1). No convincing galaxies physically associated with the quasars are found, and the number of i '-band dropouts is consistent with that found in random fields. We consider the expected dark matter halo masses that host these quasars under the assumption that a correlation between black hole mass and dark matter halo mass exists. We show that the steepness of the high-mass tail of the halo mass function at this redshift, combined with realistic amounts of scatter in this correlation, leads to expected halo masses substantially lower than previously believed. This analysis can explain the lack of companion galaxies found here and the low dynamical mass recently published for one of the quasars.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations86
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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