MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159589793 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014597

HerMES: Halo occupation number and bias properties of dusty galaxies from angular clustering measurements

2010· article· en· W2159589793 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of SciencesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCalifornia Institute of TechnologyImperial College LondonCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesCardiff University
KeywordsHaloDark matterGalaxyDark matter haloGalactic haloAngular diameterFlux (metallurgy)Population

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measure the angular correlation function, w(θ), from 0.5 to 30 arcmin of detected sources in two wide fields of the Herschel Multi-tiered Extragalactic Survey (HerMES). Our measurements are consistent with the expected clustering shape from a population of sources that trace the dark matter density field, including non-linear clustering at arcminute angular scales arising from multiple sources that occupy the same dark matter halos. By making use of the halo model to connect the spatial clustering of sources to the dark matter halo distribution, we estimate source bias and halo occupation number for dusty sub-mm galaxies at z ∼ 2. We find that sub-mm galaxies with 250 μm flux densities above 30 mJy reside in dark matter halos with mass above (5±4)×1012 , while (14±8)% of such sources appear as satellites in more massive halos.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations68
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207