MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092887956 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/745/1/31

THE<i>HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE</i>CLUSTER SUPERNOVA SURVEY. VI. THE VOLUMETRIC TYPE Ia SUPERNOVA RATE

2011· article· en· W2092887956 on OpenAlexaff
K. Barbary, G. Aldering, R. Amanullah, M. Brodwin, N. Connolly, Kyle Dawson, Mamoru Doi, Peter Eisenhardt, L. Faccioli, V. Fadeyev, H. K. Fakhouri, A. S. Fruchter, David Gilbank, M. D. Gladders, G. Goldhaber, A. Goobar, Takashi Hattori, E. Y. Hsiao, Xiaosheng Huang, Y. Ihara, Nobunari Kashikawa, Benjamin P. Koester, K. Konishi, M. Kowalski, C. Lidman, L. M. Lubin, J. Meyers, Tomoki Morokuma, Oda T, N. Panagia, S. Perlmutter, Marc Postman, P. Ripoche, P. Rosati, D. Rubin, David J. Schlegel, A. L. Spadafora, S. A. Stanford, M. Strovink, N. Suzuki, N. Takanashi, K. Tokita, Naoki Yasuda

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupernovaPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftHubble space telescopeGalaxyFlatteningExtinction (optical mineralogy)Cluster (spacecraft)Redshift surveyAstronomyAdvanced Camera for SurveysHubble's lawType (biology)Optics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a measurement of the volumetric Type Ia supernova (SN Ia) rate out to z ≃ 1.6 from the Hubble Space Telescope Cluster Supernova Survey. In observations spanning 189 orbits with the Advanced Camera for Surveys we discovered 29 SNe, of which approximately 20 are SNe Ia. Twelve of these SNe Ia are located in the foregrounds and backgrounds of the clusters targeted in the survey. Using these new data, we derive the volumetric SN Ia rate in four broad redshift bins, finding results consistent with previous measurements at z ≳ 1 and strengthening the case for an SN Ia rate that is ≳ 0.6 × 10 −4 h 3 70 yr −1 Mpc −3 at z ∼ 1 and flattening out at higher redshift. We provide SN candidates and efficiency calculations in a form that makes it easy to rebin and combine these results with other measurements for increased statistics. Finally, we compare the assumptions about host-galaxy dust extinction used in different high-redshift rate measurements, finding that different assumptions may induce significant systematic differences between measurements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations40
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207