MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bayesian galaxy shape measurement for weak lensing surveys - I. Methodology and a fast-fitting algorithm

2007· article· en· W2169600915 on OpenAlexaff
L. Miller, T. D. Kitching, Catherine Heymans, Alan Heavens, Ludovic Van Waerbeke

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsWeak gravitational lensingAlgorithmGalaxyBayesian probabilityComputationGravitational lensContext (archaeology)Observational errorAstrophysicsStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The principles of measuring the shapes of galaxies by a model-fitting approach are discussed in the context of shape measurement for surveys of weak gravitational lensing. It is argued that such an approach should be optimal, allowing measurement with maximal signal-to-noise ratio, coupled with estimation of measurement errors. The distinction between likelihood-based and Bayesian methods is discussed. Systematic biases in the Bayesian method may be evaluated as part of the fitting process, and overall such an approach should yield unbiased shear estimation without requiring external calibration from simulations. The principal disadvantage of model fitting for large surveys is the computational time required, but here an algorithm is presented that enables large surveys to be analysed in feasible computation times. The method and algorithm is tested on simulated galaxies from the Shear TEsting Programme (STEP).

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)0.004
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 score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations250
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207