MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2853905819 · doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3016

A<i>Gaia</i>Data Release 2 catalogue of white dwarfs and a comparison with SDSS

2018· article· en· W2853905819 on OpenAlexfundno aff
N. P. Gentile Fusillo, Pier-Emmanuel Tremblay, B. T. Gänsicke, Christopher J. Manser, Tim Cunningham, Elena Cukanovaite, Mark Hollands, T. R. Marsh, R. Raddi, S. Jordan, Silvia Toonen, S. Geier, M. A. Barstow, Jeffrey D. Cummings

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPlanetary Science DivisionHorizon 2020Science Mission DirectorateScience and Technology Facilities CouncilGordon and Betty Moore FoundationEuropean Research CouncilQueen's University BelfastSeventh Framework ProgrammeSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekQueen's UniversityDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemSmithsonian InstitutionU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionOffice of ScienceLos Alamos National LaboratoryEuropean Space AgencyAlfred P. Sloan FoundationJohns Hopkins UniversitySpace Telescope Science InstituteDurham UniversityNational Science FoundationNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Central University
KeywordsPhysicsWhite dwarfAstrophysicsAstronomyMassive compact halo objectBrown dwarfStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a catalogue of white dwarf candidates selected from the second data release of Gaia (DR2). We used a sample of spectroscopically confirmed white dwarfs from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) to map the entire space spanned by these objects in the Gaia Hertzsprung–Russell diagram. We then defined a set of cuts in absolute magnitude, colour, and a number of Gaia quality flags to remove the majority of contaminating objects. Finally, we adopt a method analogous to the one presented in our earlier SDSS photometric catalogues to calculate a probability of being a white dwarf (PWD) for all Gaia sources that passed the initial selection. The final catalogue is composed of |$486\, 641$| stars with calculated PWD from which it is possible to select a sample of |${\simeq } 260\, 000$| high-confidence white dwarf candidates in the magnitude range 8 < G < 21. By comparing this catalogue with a sample of SDSS white dwarf candidates, we estimate an upper limit in completeness of 85 per cent for white dwarfs with G ≤ 20 mag and Teff >7000 K, at high Galactic latitudes (|b| > 20°). However, the completeness drops at low Galactic latitudes, and the magnitude limit of the catalogue varies significantly across the sky as a function of Gaia’s scanning law. We also provide the list of objects within our sample with available SDSS spectroscopy. We use this spectroscopic sample to characterize the observed structure of the white dwarf distribution in the H–R diagram.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.015

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations419
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207