MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015437799 · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/180/1/54

THE ACS VIRGO CLUSTER SURVEY XVI. SELECTION PROCEDURE AND CATALOGS OF GLOBULAR CLUSTER CANDIDATES

2008· article· en· W2015437799 on OpenAlexaff
Andrés Jordán, Eric W. Peng, John P. Blakeslee, Patrick Côté, S. Eyheramendy, Laura Ferrarese, S. Mei, J. Tonry, Michael J. West

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterVirgo ClusterPhysicsGalaxyPhotometry (optics)Hubble space telescopeAstrophysicsCluster (spacecraft)AstronomyAdvanced Camera for SurveysGalaxy clusterComputer scienceStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present catalogs of globular cluster candidates for the 100 galaxies of the Advanced Camera for Surveys Virgo Cluster Survey, a large program to carry out imaging of early-type members of the Virgo Cluster using the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) on the Hubble Space Telescope. We describe the procedure used to select bona fide globular cluster candidates out of the full list of detections based on model-based clustering methods with the use of expected contamination catalogs constructed using blank field observations and which are customized for each galaxy. We also present the catalogs of expected contaminants for each of our target galaxies. For each detected source we measure its position, magnitudes in the F475W (≈ Sloan g) and F850LP (≈ Sloan z) bandpasses, and half-light radii by fitting point-spread function convolved King models to the observed light distribution. These measurements are presented for 20,375 sources, of which 12,763 are likely to be globular clusters. Finally, we detail the calculation of the aperture corrections adopted for the globular cluster photometry.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations182
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207