MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2058468570 · doi:10.1086/519835

Reconstructing the Thomson Optical Depth due to Patchy Reionization with 21 cm Fluctuation Maps

2007· article· en· W2058468570 on OpenAlexaff
G. P. Holder, Ilian T. Iliev, Garrelt Mellema

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsResearch Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReionizationCosmic microwave backgroundPhysicsAstrophysicsOptical depthRedshiftPolarization (electrochemistry)COSMIC cancer databaseBrightnessElectronAstronomyOpticsAnisotropyGalaxyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large fluctuations in the electron column density can occur during the reionization process. We investigate the possibility of deriving the electron density fluctuations through detailed mapping of the redshifted 21 cm emission from the neutral medium during reionization. We find that the electron-scattering optical depth and 21 cm differential brightness temperature are strongly anticorrelated, allowing optical depth estimates based entirely on redshifted 21 cm measurements. This should help us to isolate the cosmic microwave background (CMB) polarization fluctuations due to reionization, allowing for the removal of the patchy reionization polarization signal from the other polarization signals and for a measurement of the primordial CMB quadrupole at various locations in the universe at the epoch of reionization. This latter application, in principle, allows for three-dimensional mapping of the primordial density field at z ~ 1100 over a large fraction of the Hubble volume.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→