MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Herschel-Astrophysical Terahertz Large Area Survey: detection of a far-infrared population around galaxy clusters★

2011· article· en· W2104115667 on OpenAlexafffund
K. E. K. Coppin, J. E. Geach, Ian Smail, L. Dunne, A. C. Edge, R. J. Ivison, S. Maddox, R. Auld, M. Baes, S. Buttiglione, A. Cava, D. L. Clements, A. Cooray, A. Dariush, G. de Zotti, S. Dye, S. Eales, J. Fritz, R. Hopwood, E. Ibar, M. J. Jarvis, M. J. Michałowski, D. N. A. Murphy, M. Negrello, E. Pascale, M. Pohlen, E. E. Rigby, G. Rodighiero, D. Scott, S. Serjeant, D. J. B. Smith, P. Temi, P. van der Werf

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilMcGill UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyStar formationFar infraredCluster (spacecraft)AstronomyGalaxy clusterRADIUSInfraredActive galactic nucleusLuminous infrared galaxyStar clusterPopulationTerahertz radiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the detection of a significant excess in the surface density of far-infrared sources from the Herschel-Astrophysical Terahertz Large Area Survey within ∼1 Mpc of the centres of 66 optically selected clusters of galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey with 〈z〉∼ 0.25. From the analysis of the multiwavelength properties of their counterparts we conclude that the far-infrared emission is associated with dust-obscured star formation and/or active galactic nuclei (AGN) within galaxies in the clusters themselves. The excess reaches a maximum at a radius of ∼0.8 Mpc, where we find 1.0 ± 0.3 S250 > 34 mJy sources on average per cluster above what would be expected for random field locations. If the far-infrared emission is dominated by star formation (as opposed to AGN) then this corresponds to an average star formation rate of ∼7 M⊙ yr−1 per cluster in sources with LIR > 5 × 1010 L⊙. Although lensed sources make a negligible contribution to the excess signal, a fraction of the sources around the clusters could be gravitationally lensed, and we have identified a sample of potential cases of cluster-lensed Herschel sources that could be targeted in follow-up studies.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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