MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160115277 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/769/2/l31

HerMES: A DEFICIT IN THE SURFACE BRIGHTNESS OF THE COSMIC INFRARED BACKGROUND DUE TO GALAXY CLUSTER GRAVITATIONAL LENSING

2013· article· en· W2160115277 on OpenAlexaff
M. Zemcov, A. W. Blain, Asantha Cooray, M. Béthermin, J. J. Bock, D. L. Clements, A. Conley, L. Conversi, C. D. Dowell, D. Farrah, J. Glenn, M. J. Griffin, M. Halpern, Eric Jullo, Jean‐Paul Kneib, G. Marsden, H. T. Nguyen, S. J. Oliver, Johan Richard, I. G. Roseboom, B. Schulz, D. Scott, D. L. Shupe, A. J. Smith, I. Valtchanov, M. Viero, L. Wang, J. L. Wardlow

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsCosmic infrared backgroundGalaxyAstronomyGravitational lensAmplitudeSurface brightnessWeak gravitational lensingPopulationGalaxy clusterRedshiftBrightnessCosmic microwave backgroundOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have observed four massive galaxy clusters with the SPIRE instrument on the Herschel Space Observatory and measure a deficit of surface brightness within their central region after removing detected sources. We simulate the effects of instrumental sensitivity and resolution, the source population, and the lensing effect of the clusters to estimate the shape and amplitude of the deficit. The amplitude of the central deficit is a strong function of the surface density and flux distribution of the background sources. We find that for the current best fitting faint end number counts, and excellent lensing models, the most likely amplitude of the central deficit is the full intensity of the cosmic infrared background (CIB). Our measurement leads to a lower limit to the integrated total intensity of the CIB of MJy sr −1 , with more CIB possible from both low-redshift sources and from sources within the target clusters. It should be possible to observe this effect in existing high angular resolution data at other wavelengths where the CIB is bright, which would allow tests of models of the faint source component of the CIB.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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