MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014720123 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/3/906

THE CANADA-FRANCE HIGH-<i>z</i>QUASAR SURVEY: NINE NEW QUASARS AND THE LUMINOSITY FUNCTION AT REDSHIFT 6

2010· article· en· W2014720123 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chris J. Willott, P. Delorme, C. Reylé, Loïc Albert, J. Bergeron, D. Crampton, X. Delfosse, T. Forveille, John B. Hutchings, R. J. McLure, A. Omont, D. Schade

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuasarAstrophysicsRedshiftPhysicsLuminosity functionReionizationLuminosityGalaxyAbsolute magnitudeAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present discovery imaging and spectroscopy for nine new z ∼ 6 quasars found in the Canada–France High- z Quasar Survey (CFHQS) bringing the total number of CFHQS quasars to 19. By combining the CFHQS with the more luminous Sloan Digital Sky Survey sample, we are able to derive the quasar luminosity function from a sample of 40 quasars at redshifts 5.74 < z < 6.42. Our binned luminosity function shows a slightly lower normalization and flatter slope than found in previous work. The binned data also suggest a break in the luminosity function at M 1450 ≈ −25. A double power-law maximum likelihood fit to the data is consistent with the binned results. The luminosity function is strongly constrained (1σ uncertainty <0.1 dex) over the range −27.5 < M 1450 < −24.7. The best-fit parameters are Φ( M * 1450 ) = 1.14 × 10 −8 Mpc −3 mag −1 , break magnitude M * 1450 = −25.13, and bright end slope β = −2.81. However, the covariance between β and M * 1450 prevents strong constraints being placed on either parameter. For a break magnitude in the range −26 < M * 1450 < −24, we find −3.8 < β < −2.3 at 95% confidence. We calculate the z = 6 quasar intergalactic ionizing flux and show it is between 20 and 100 times lower than that necessary for reionization. Finally, we use the luminosity function to predict how many higher redshift quasars may be discovered in future near-IR imaging surveys.

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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations514
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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