MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075900399 · doi:10.1086/518693

The Angular Correlations of Galaxies in the COSMOS Field

2007· article· en· W2075900399 on OpenAlexaffabout
H. J. McCracken, J. A. Peacock, L. Guzzo, P. Capak, C. Porciani, N. Scoville, A. Finoguenov, J. Berian James, Manfred G. Kitzbichler, Anton M. Koekemoer, Alexie Leauthaud, O. Le Fèvre, R. Massey, Y. Mellier, Bahram Mobasher, P. Norberg, Jason Rhodes, D. B. Sanders, S. Sasaki, Y. Taniguchi, D. J. Thompson, Simon D. M. White, Amr El‐Zant

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmic variancePhysicsGalaxyAstrophysicsMagnitude (astronomy)COSMIC cancer databaseAstronomyTelescopeAmplitudeHubble Deep FieldCorrelation function (quantum field theory)Angular diameterHubble space telescopeRedshiftStarsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present measurements of the two-point galaxy angular correlation function w(θ) in the COSMOS field. Independent determinations of w(θ) as a function of magnitude limit are presented for both the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) ACS catalog and also the ground-based data from Subaru and the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope. Despite having significantly different masks, these three determinations agree well. At bright magnitudes (I_(AB) < 22), our data generally match very well with existing measurements and with mock catalogs based on the semianalytic galaxy formation calculations of Kitzbichler & White (2007) from the Millennium Simulation. The exception is that our result is at the upper end of the expected cosmic variance scatter for θ > 10', which we attribute to a particularly rich structure known to exist at z ≃ 0.8. For fainter samples, however, the level of clustering is somewhat higher than reported by some previous studies; in all three catalogs we find w(θ = 1') ≃ 0.014 at a median I_(AB) magnitude of 24. At these very faintest magnitudes, our measurements agree well with the latest determinations from the Canada-France Legacy Survey. This level of clustering is approximately double what is predicted by the semianalytic catalogs (at all angles). The semianalytic results allow an estimate of cosmic variance, which is too small to account for the discrepancy. We therefore conclude that the mean amplitude of clustering at this level is higher than previously estimated.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations64
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207