MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113058621 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sls002

Extragalactic number counts at 100 μm, free from cosmic variance

2012· article· en· W2113058621 on OpenAlexaff
B. Sibthorpe, R. J. Ivison, R. Massey, I. G. Roseboom, P. van der Werf, Brenda C. Matthews, J. S. Greaves

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsCOSMIC cancer databaseCosmic varianceVariance (accounting)AstronomyGalaxyRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We use data from the Disc Emission via a Bias-free Reconnaissance in the Infrared/Submillimetre (DEBRIS) survey, taken at 100 μm with the Photoconductor Array Camera and Spectrometer instrument on board the Herschel Space Observatory, to make a cosmic variance independent measurement of the extragalactic number counts. These data consist of 323 small-area mapping observations performed uniformly across the sky, and thus represent a sparse sampling of the astronomical sky with an effective coverage of ∼2.5 deg2. We find our cosmic variance independent analysis to be consistent with previous count measurements made using relatively small area surveys. Furthermore, we find no statistically significant cosmic variance on any scale within the errors of our data. Finally, we interpret these results to estimate the probability of galaxy source confusion in the study of debris discs.

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)0.005
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207