MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068740611 · doi:10.1086/301557

A New Method For Galaxy Cluster Detection. I. The Algorithm

2000· article· en· W2068740611 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedshiftGalaxyGalaxy clusterCluster (spacecraft)Simple (philosophy)Elliptical galaxyPopulationSequence (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous methods for finding clusters at moderate to high redshifts have been proposed in recent years, at wavelengths ranging from radio to X-rays. In this paper we describe a new method for detecting clusters in two-band optical/near-IR imaging data. The method relies upon the observation that all rich clusters, at all redshifts observed so far, appear to have a red sequence of early-type galaxies. The emerging picture is that all rich clusters contain a core population of passively evolving elliptical galaxies that are coeval and formed at high redshifts. The proposed search method exploits this strong empirical fact by using the red sequence as a direct indicator of overdensity. The fundamental advantage of this approach is that with appropriate filters, cluster elliptical galaxies at a given redshift are redder than all normal galaxies at lower redshifts. A simple color cut thus virtually eliminates all foreground contamination, even at significant redshifts. In this paper, one of a series of two, we describe the underlying assumptions and basic techniques of the method in detail and contrast the method with those used by other authors. We provide a brief demonstration of the effectiveness of the technique using a real photometric sample with redshift data, and from this we conclude that the method offers a powerful yet simple way of identify galaxy clusters. We find that the method can reliably detect structures to masses as small as groups with velocity dispersions of only ∼300 km s -1 , with redshifts for all detected structures estimated to an accuracy of ∼10%.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.011

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 head0.241
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations620
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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