MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514711714 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/833/1/67

ALMA SPECTROSCOPIC SURVEY IN THE HUBBLE ULTRA DEEP FIELD: SURVEY DESCRIPTION

2016· article· en· W2514711714 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Institutes of Natural SciencesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanNational Science CouncilDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Science FoundationKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteNational Radio Astronomy Observatory
KeywordsRedshiftEmission spectrumLine (geometry)Hubble Deep FieldSpectral lineHubble Ultra-Deep FieldObservational cosmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present the rationale for and the observational description of ASPECS: the ALMA SPECtroscopic Survey in the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field (UDF), the cosmological deep field that has the deepest multi-wavelength data available. Our overarching goal is to obtain an unbiased census of molecular gas and dust continuum emission in high-redshift ( z > 0.5) galaxies. The ∼1′ region covered within the UDF was chosen to overlap with the deepest available imaging from the Hubble Space Telescope . Our ALMA observations consist of full frequency scans in band 3 (84–115 GHz) and band 6 (212–272 GHz) at approximately uniform line sensitivity ( 2 × 10 9 K km s −1 pc 2 ), and continuum noise levels of 3.8 μ Jy beam −1 and 12.7 μ Jy beam −1 , respectively. The molecular surveys cover the different rotational transitions of the CO molecule, leading to essentially full redshift coverage. The [C ii ] emission line is also covered at redshifts . We present a customized algorithm to identify line candidates in the molecular line scans and quantify our ability to recover artificial sources from our data. Based on whether multiple CO lines are detected, and whether optical spectroscopic redshifts as well as optical counterparts exist, we constrain the most likely line identification. We report 10 (11) CO line candidates in the 3 mm (1 mm) band, and our statistical analysis shows that <4 of these (in each band) are likely spurious. Less than one-third of the total CO flux in the low- J CO line candidates are from sources that are not associated with an optical/NIR counterpart. We also present continuum maps of both the band 3 and band 6 observations. The data presented here form the basis of a number of dedicated studies that are presented in subsequent papers.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations241
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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