MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2061733183 · doi:10.1086/429871

An Automated Method for the Detection and Extraction of H<scp>i</scp>Self‐Absorption in High‐Resolution 21 Centimeter Line Surveys

2005· article· en· W2061733183 on OpenAlexaff
S. J. Gibson, A. R. Taylor, L. A. Higgs, Christopher M. Brunt, P. E. Dewdney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical ObservatoryUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAmplitudeBrightnessAbsorption (acoustics)VoxelPixelNoise (video)Brightness temperatureLine (geometry)Hydrogen lineAstrophysicsOpticsComputational physicsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe algorithms that detect 21 cm line H I self-absorption (HISA) in large data sets and extract it for analysis. Our search method identifies HISA as spatially and spectrally confined dark H I features that appear as negative residuals after removing larger scale emission components with a modified CLEAN algorithm. Adjacent HISA volume-pixels (voxels) are grouped into features in ( l , b , v ) space, and the H I brightness of voxels outside the three-dimensional feature boundaries is smoothly interpolated to estimate the absorption amplitude and the unabsorbed H I emission brightness. The reliability and completeness of our HISA detection scheme have been tested extensively with model data. We detect most features over a wide range of sizes, line widths, amplitudes, and background levels, with poor detection only where the absorption brightness temperature amplitude is weak, the absorption scale approaches that of the correlated noise, or the background level is too faint for HISA to be distinguished reliably from emission gaps. False detection rates are very low in all parts of the parameter space except at sizes and amplitudes approaching those of noise fluctuations. Absorption measurement biases introduced by the method are generally small and appear to arise from cases of incomplete HISA detection. This paper is the third in a series examining HISA at high angular resolution. A companion paper (Paper II) uses our HISA search and extraction method to investigate the cold atomic gas distribution in the Canadian Galactic Plane Survey.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→