MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Mid-infrared sources in the ELAIS Deep X-ray Survey

2004· article· en· W2060679251 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSource countsGalaxyHubble Deep FieldFlux (metallurgy)Active galactic nucleusObservatoryCOSMIC cancer databaseStar formationPoint source

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a cross-correlation of the European Large Area Infrared Space Observatory (ISO) survey (ELAIS) with the ELAIS Deep X-ray Survey of the N1 and N2 fields.There are seven Chandra point sources with matches in the ELAIS Final Analysis 15-µm catalogue, out of a total of 28 extragalactic ISO sources present in the Chandra fields.Five of these are consistent with active galactic nuclei (AGN) giving an AGN fraction of ∼19 per cent in the 15-µm flux range 0.8-6 mJy.We have co-added the hard X-ray fluxes of the individually undetected ISO sources and find a low significance detection consistent with star formation in the remaining population.We combine our point source cross-correlation fraction with the XMM-Newton observations of the Lockman Hole and Chandra observations of the Hubble Deep Field North to constrain source count models of the mid-infrared galaxy population.The low dust-enshrouded AGN fraction in ELAIS implied by the number of cross-identifications between the ELAIS mid-infrared sample and the Chandra point sources is encouraging for the use of mid-infrared surveys to constrain the cosmic star formation history, provided there are not further large undetected populations of Compton-thick AGN.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→