MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158528198 · doi:10.1086/516585

The Cosmic Evolution Survey (COSMOS): Overview

2007· article· en· W2158528198 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
N. Z. Scoville, M. Brusa, P. Capak, C. M. Carollo, M. Elvis, Mauro Giavalisco, L. Guzzo, G. Hasinger, C. D. Impey, Jean‐Paul Kneib, O. LeFèvre, S. J. Lilly, Bahram Mobasher, A. Renzini, R. Michael Rich, D. B. Sanders, Eva Schinnerer, D. Schminovich, P. L. Shopbell, Y. Taniguchi, Neil deGrasse Tyson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmic variancePhysicsCosmos (plant)RedshiftCOSMIC cancer databaseGalaxyActive galactic nucleusAstrophysicsAstronomyDark matterRedshift surveyPhysical cosmologyObservational cosmologyStar formationGalaxy formation and evolutionCosmologyDark energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cosmic Evolution Survey (COSMOS) is designed to probe the correlated evolution of galaxies, star formation, active galactic nuclei (AGNs), and dark matter (DM) with large-scale structure (LSS) over the redshift range z > 0.5-6. The survey includes multiwavelength imaging and spectroscopy from X-ray-to-radio wavelengths covering a 2 deg 2 area, including HST imaging. Given the very high sensitivity and resolution of these data sets, COSMOS also provides unprecedented samples of objects at high redshift with greatly reduced cosmic variance, compared to earlier surveys. Here we provide a brief overview of the survey strategy, the characteristics of the major COSMOS data sets, and a summary the science goals.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0120.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.007

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations2,002
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207