MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593774047 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322130

The one-dimensional Ly<i>α</i>forest power spectrum from BOSS

2013· article· en· W2593774047 on OpenAlexfundno aff
N. Palanque‐Delabrouille, Christophe Yèche, Arnaud Borde, Jean-Marc Le Goff, Graziano Rossi, Matteo Viel, É. Aubourg, S. Bailey, Julian Bautista, Michael Blomqvist, A. Bolton, James S. Bolton, Nicolás G. Busca, Bill Carithers, Rupert A. C. Croft, Kyle Dawson, Timothée Delubac, Andreu Font-Ribera, Shirley Ho, D. Kirkby, Khee‐Gan Lee, Daniel Margala, Jordi Miralda‐Escudé, Demitri Muna, Adam D. Myers, P. Noterdaeme, Isabelle Pâris, Patrick Petitjean, Matthew M. Pieri, Emmanuel Rollinde, Nicholas P. Ross, David J. Schlegel, Donald P. Schneider, Anže Slosar, David H. Weinberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityAgence Nationale de la RechercheYork UniversityUniversity of ArizonaPennsylvania State UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityUniversity of UtahOhio State UniversityNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonAlfred P. Sloan FoundationNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of PortsmouthVanderbilt UniversityYale UniversityPrinceton UniversityBrookhaven National LaboratoryU.S. Department of EnergyUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsCosmic microwave backgroundPhysicsRedshiftAstrophysicsSpectral lineQuasarSpectral densityPlanckEstimatorComputational physicsStatisticsAnisotropyOpticsMathematicsGalaxyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed two independent methods for measuring the one-dimensional power spectrum of the transmitted flux in the Lyman-α forest. The first method is based on a Fourier transform and the second on a maximum-likelihood estimator. The two methods are independent and have different systematic uncertainties. Determination of the noise level in the data spectra was subject to a new treatment, because of its significant impact on the derived power spectrum. We applied the two methods to 13 821 quasar spectra from SDSS-III/BOSS DR9 selected from a larger sample of over 60 000 spectra on the basis of their high quality, high signal-to-noise ratio (S/N), and good spectral resolution. The power spectra measured using either approach are in good agreement over all twelve redshift bins from ⟨z⟩ = 2.2 to ⟨z⟩ = 4.4, and scales from 0.001 km s-1 to 0.02 km s-1. We determined the methodological andinstrumental systematic uncertainties of our measurements. We provide a preliminary cosmological interpretation of our measurements using available hydrodynamical simulations. The improvement in precision over previously published results from SDSS is a factor 2–3 for constraints on relevant cosmological parameters. For a ΛCDM model and using a constraint on H0 that encompasses measurements based on the local distance ladder and on CMB anisotropies, we infer σ8 = 0.83 ± 0.03 and ns = 0.97 ± 0.02 based on H i absorption in the range 2.1 < z < 3.7.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations221
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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