MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054836946 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/2/1180

GALAXY CLUSTERS SELECTED WITH THE SUNYAEV-ZEL'DOVICH EFFECT FROM 2008 SOUTH POLE TELESCOPE OBSERVATIONS

2010· article· en· W2054836946 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersKavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, University of ChicagoAdolph C. and Mary Sprague Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science, University of California BerkeleyW. M. Keck FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRedshiftCMB cold spotCosmologyGalaxy clusterGalaxySouth Pole TelescopeSkyCluster (spacecraft)Telescope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a detection-significance-limited catalog of 21 Sunyaev–Zel'dovich-selected galaxy clusters. These clusters, along with one unconfirmed candidate, were identified in 178 deg 2 of sky surveyed in 2008 by the South Pole Telescope (SPT) to a depth of 18 μK arcmin at 150 GHz. Optical imaging from the Blanco Cosmology Survey (BCS) and Magellan telescopes provided photometric (and in some cases spectroscopic) redshift estimates, with catalog redshifts ranging from z = 0.15 to z >1, with a median z = 0.74. Of the 21 confirmed galaxy clusters, 3 were previously identified as Abell clusters, 3 were presented as SPT discoveries in Staniszewski et al., and 3 were first identified in a recent analysis of BCS data by Menanteau et al.; the remaining 12 clusters are presented for the first time in this work. Simulated observations of the SPT fields predict the sample to be nearly 100% complete above a mass threshold of M 200 ≈ 5 × 10 14 M ☉ h −1 at z = 0.6. This completeness threshold pushes to lower mass with increasing redshift, dropping to ∼4 × 10 14 M ☉ h −1 at z = 1. The size and redshift distribution of this catalog are in good agreement with expectations based on our current understanding of galaxy clusters and cosmology. In combination with other cosmological probes, we use this cluster catalog to improve estimates of cosmological parameters. Assuming a standard spatially flat wCDM cosmological model, the addition of our catalog to the WMAP seven-year results yields σ 8 = 0.81 ± 0.09 and w = −1.07 ± 0.29, a ∼50% improvement in precision on both parameters over WMAP7 alone.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

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

Citations335
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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