MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Submillimetre photometry of typical high-redshift radio quasars

2004· article· en· W2085087623 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Rawlings, Chris J. Willott, Gary J. Hill, E. N. Archibald, J. S. Dunlop, D. H. Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsRedshiftAstrophysicsQuasarPhotometry (optics)AstronomyPopulationLuminosityGalaxyRedshift surveyActive galactic nucleusRadio galaxyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present Submillimetre Common-User Bolometer Array (SCUBA) photometry of a sample of eight high-redshift (2.5 ≤z < 3.5) radio quasars from two redshift surveys: the TexOx-1000 (or TOOT) Survey and the 7C Redshift Survey (7CRS). Unlike the powerful high-redshift radio sources observed previously in the submillimetre, these radio sources are typical of those dominating the radio luminosity density of the population. We detect just two of the TOOT/7CRS targets at 850 μm, and one of these detections is probably due to synchrotron emission rather than dust. The population represented by the other six objects is detected in a statistical sense with their average 850-μm flux density implying that they are similar to low-redshift, far-infrared luminous quasars undergoing at most moderate (≲200 M⊙yr−1) starbursts. By considering all the SCUBA data available for radio sources, we conclude that positive correlations between rest-frame far-infrared luminosity LFIR, 151-MHz luminosity L151 and redshift z, although likely to be present, are hard to interpret because of subtle selection and classification biases, small number statistics and uncertainties concerning synchrotron contamination and k-correction. We argue that there is not yet any compelling evidence for significant differences in the submillimetre properties of radio-loud and radio-quiet quasars at high redshift.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→