LQAC-4: Fourth release of the Large Quasar Astrometric Catalogue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context.From an astrometric point of view, quasars constitute the best and almost ideal reference objects in the celestial sphere, with a priori no significant proper motion. Since the third release of the Large Quasar Astrometric Catalogue (LQAC-3), a large number of quasars have been discovered, in particular those coming from the DR12Q release of the SDSS. Moreover, for cross-matched objects, we have taken advantage of the very accurate determinations of the quasars identified within the recentGaiaDR1 catalogue. Aims.Following the same procedure as in the three previous releases of the LQAC, our aim is to compile the large majority of all the quasars recorded so far. Our goal is to record their best coordinates and substantial information concerning their physical properties such as the redshift as well as multi-bands apparent and absolute magnitudes. Emphasis is given to the results of the cross-matches with theGaiaDR1 catalogue. Methods.New quasars coming from the DR12Q release were cross-matched with the precedent LQAC-3 compilation with a 1′′ search radius, in order to add the objects without counterpart to the LQAC-4 compilation. A similar cross-match was done withGaiaDR1 to identify the known quasars detected byGaia. This enables one to improve significantly the positioning of these objects, and in parallel to study the astrometric performance of the individual catalogues of the LQAC-4 compilation. Finally, a new method was used to determine absolute magnitudes. Results.Our final catalogue, called LQAC-4, contains 443 725 objects. This is roughly 37.82% more than the number of objects recorded in the LQAC-3. Among them, 249 071 were found in common with theGaiaDR1, with a 1′′ search radius. That corresponds to 56.13% of the whole population in the compilation. Conclusions.The LQAC-4 delivers to the astronomical community a nearly complete catalogue of spectroscopically confirmed quasars (including a small proportion of compact AGNs), with the aim of giving their best equatorial coordinates with respect to the ICRF2 and with exhaustive additional information. For more than 50% of the sample, these coordinates come from the very recentGaiaDR1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.022 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".