MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523032608 · doi:10.3847/0004-637x/829/1/44

THE NEXT GENERATION VIRGO CLUSTER SURVEY. XX. RedGOLD BACKGROUND GALAXY CLUSTER DETECTIONS

2016· preprint· en· W2523032608 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rossella Licitra, S. Mei, Anand Raichoor, T. Erben, H. Hildebrandt, Roberto P. Muñoz, Ludovic Van Waerbeke, Patrick Côté, Jean‐Charles Cuillandre, Pierre-Alain Duc, Laura Ferrarese, Stephen Gwyn, A. Lançon, Carolina Parroni, Thomas H. Puzia

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPhysicsVirgo ClusterAstrophysicsGalaxy clusterCluster (spacecraft)GalaxyRedshiftAstronomyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We build a background cluster candidate catalog from the Next Generation Virgo Cluster Survey (NGVS) using our detection algorithm RedGOLD. The NGVS covers 104 deg2 of the Virgo cluster in the -bandpasses to a depth of g ∼ 25.7 mag (5σ). Part of the survey was not covered or has shallow observations in the r band. We build two cluster catalogs: one using all bandpasses, for the fields with deep r-band observations (∼20 deg2), and the other using four bandpasses ( ) for the entire NGVS area. Based on our previous Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey W1 studies, we estimate that both of our catalogs are ∼100% (∼70%) complete and ∼80% pure, at z ≤ 0.6 (z ≲ 1), for galaxy clusters with masses of M ≳ 1014 M ⊙. We show that when using four bandpasses, though the photometric redshift accuracy is lower, RedGOLD detects massive galaxy clusters up to z ∼ 1 with completeness and purity similar to the five-band case. This is achieved when taking into account the bias in the richness estimation, which is ∼40% lower at 0.5 ≤ z < 0.6 and ∼20% higher at 0.6 < z < 0.8, with respect to the five-band case. RedGOLD recovers all the X-ray clusters in the area with mass M 500 > 1.4 × 1014 M ⊙ and 0.08 < z < 0.5. Because of our different cluster richness limits and the NGVS depth, our catalogs reach lower masses than the published redMaPPer cluster catalog over the area, and we recover ∼90%–100% of its detections.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.309
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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207