MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2061859185 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/1/281

NON-GAUSSIAN SCATTER IN CLUSTER SCALING RELATIONS

2010· article· en· W2061859185 on OpenAlexaff
L. Shaw, G. P. Holder, J. P. Dudley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKurtosisSkewnessPhysicsRedshiftGaussianScalingCluster (spacecraft)Statistical physicsObservableFunction (biology)StatisticsAstrophysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the impact of non-Gaussian scatter in the cluster mass-observable scaling relation on the mass and redshift distribution of clusters detected by wide area surveys. We parameterize non-Gaussian scatter by incorporating the third and fourth moments (skewness and kurtosis) into the distribution P ( M obs | M ). We demonstrate that the effect of the higher order moments becomes important when the product of the standard deviation of P ( M obs | M ) and the slope of the mass function is greater than unity. For high scatter mass indicators it is therefore necessary for the survey, limiting mass threshold to be less than 10 14 h −1 M ☉ , to prevent the skewness from having a significant impact on the observed number counts, particularly at high redshift. We also show that an unknown level of non-Gaussianity in the scatter is equivalent to an additional uncertainty on the variance in P ( M obs | M ) and thus may limit the constraints that can be placed on σ 8 and the dark energy equation of state parameter w .

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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