MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017024963 · doi:10.1086/423175

The Phoenix Deep Survey: Optical and Near‐infrared Imaging Catalogs

2004· article· en· W2017024963 on OpenAlexaff
M. Sullivan, Andrew Hopkins, J. Afonso, A. Georgakakis, B. Chan, L. E. Cram, B. Mobasher, C. Almeida

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedshiftAstrophysicsPhysicsGalaxyPhoenixAstronomyInfraredOptical imagingStar formationRemote sensingOpticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Phoenix Deep Survey is a multiwavelength galaxy survey based on deep 1.4 GHz radio imaging. The primary goal of this survey is to investigate the properties of star formation in galaxies and to trace the evolution in those properties to a redshift z = 1, covering a significant fraction of the age of the universe. By compiling a sample of star-forming galaxies based on selection at radio wavelengths we eliminate possible biases due to dust obscuration, a significant issue when selecting objects at optical and ultraviolet wavelengths. In this paper, we present the catalogs and results of deep optical ( UBVRI ) and near-infrared ( Ks ) imaging of the deepest region of the existing decimetric radio imaging. The observations and data processing are summarized and the construction of the optical source catalogs described, together with the details of the identification of candidate optical counterparts to the radio catalogs. Based on our UBVRIKs imaging, photometric redshift estimates for the optical counterparts to the radio detections are explored.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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