MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159407551 · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/188/1/123

THE BOLOCAM GALACTIC PLANE SURVEY. II. CATALOG OF THE IMAGE DATA

2010· article· en· W2159407551 on OpenAlexaff
Erik Rosolowsky, Miranda K. Dunham, Adam Ginsburg, E. T. Bradley, James Aguirre, John Bally, Cara Battersby, C. J. Cyganowski, Meredith M. Drosback, Neal J. Evans, Jason Glenn, P. M. Harvey, Guy S. Stringfellow, Josh Walawender, Jonathan P. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalactic planeAstrophysicsPhysicsMillimeterMolecular cloudCluster (spacecraft)AstronomyGalaxyStarsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a catalog of 8358 sources extracted from images produced by the Bolocam Galactic Plane Survey (BGPS). The BGPS is a survey of the millimeter dust continuum emission from the northern Galactic plane. The catalog sources are extracted using a custom algorithm, Bolocat, which was designed specifically to identify and characterize objects in the large-area maps generated from the Bolocam instrument. The catalog products are designed to facilitate follow-up observations of these relatively unstudied objects. The catalog is 98% complete from 0.4 Jy to 60 Jy over all object sizes for which the survey is sensitive (<3 5). We find that the sources extracted can best be described as molecular clumps—large dense regions in molecular clouds linked to cluster formation. We find that the flux density distribution of sources follows a power law with dN / dS ∝ S −2.4±0.1 and that the mean Galactic latitude for sources is significantly below the midplane: 〈 b 〉 = (−0 095 ± 0 001).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.012

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 head0.259
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations252
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207