MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077993761 · doi:10.1086/344947

Variability-selected Quasars in MACHO Project Magellanic Cloud Fields

2003· article· en· W2077993761 on OpenAlexaff
Marla Geha, C. Alcock, R. A. Allsman, D. Alves, T. S. Axelrod, A. C. Becker, D. P. Bennett, K. H. Cook, A. J. Drake, K. C. Freeman, K. Griest, S. Keller, M. J. Lehner, S. L. Marshall, D. Minniti, C. A. Nelson, B. A. Peterson, Piotr Popowski, M. R. Pratt, P. J. Quinn, C. W. Stubbs, Will Sutherland, A. Tomaney, T. Vandehei, D. L. Welch

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuasarLarge Magellanic CloudPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomySmall Magellanic CloudRedshiftStarsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present 47 spectroscopically-confirmed quasars discovered behind the Magellanic Clouds identified via photometric variability in the MACHO database. Thirty-eight quasars lie behind the Large Magellanic Cloud and nine behind the Small Magellanic Cloud, more than tripling the number of quasars previously known in this region. The quasars cover the redshift interval 0.2 < z < 2.8 and apparent mean magnitudes 16.6 < V < 20.1. We discuss the details of quasar candidate selection based on time variability in the MACHO database and present results of spectroscopic follow-up observations. Our follow-up detection efficiency was 20%; the primary contaminants were emission-line Be stars in Magellanic Clouds. For the 47 quasars discovered behind the Magellanic Clouds plus an additional 12 objects previously identified in this region, we present 7.5-year MACHO V- and R-band lightcurves with average sampling times of 2-10 days.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

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

Citations108
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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