MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An AzTEC 1.1 mm survey of the GOODS-N field - I. Maps, catalogue and source statistics

2008· article· en· W2157602865 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsField (mathematics)CitationThe artsStatistical analysisField survey

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have conducted a deep and uniform 1.1 mm survey of the Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey-North (GOODS-N) field with AzTEC on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope. Here, we present the first results from this survey including maps, the source catalogue and 1.1 mm number counts. The results presented here were obtained from a 245 arcmin2 region with a near uniform coverage to a depth of 0.96–1.16 mJy beam−1. Our robust catalogue contains 28 source candidates detected with S/N ≥ 3.75, only ∼1– 2 of which are expected to be spurious detections. Of these source candidates, eight are also detected by Submillimetre Common-User Bolometer Array (SCUBA) at 850 μm in regions where there is a good overlap between the two surveys. The major advantage of our survey over that with SCUBA is the uniformity of coverage. We calculate number counts using two different techniques: the first using a frequentist parameter estimation and the second using a Bayesian method. The two sets of results are in good agreement. We find that the 1.1 mm differential number counts are well described in the 2–6 mJy range by the functional form dN/dS=N′(S′/S) exp(−S/S′) with fitted parameters S′= 1.25 ± 0.38 mJy and dN/dS= 300 ± 90 mJy−1deg−2 at 3 mJy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

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

Citations118
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207