The case for a high-redshift origin of GRB 100205A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The number of long gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) known to have occurred in the distant Universe (z > 5) is small (∼15); however, these events provide a powerful way of probing star formation at the onset of galaxy evolution. In this paper, we present the case for GRB 100205A being a largely overlooked high-redshift event. While initially noted as a high-z candidate, this event and its host galaxy have not been explored in detail. By combining optical and near-infrared Gemini afterglow imaging (at t < 1.3 d since burst) with deep late-time limits on host emission from the Hubble Space Telescope, we show that the most likely scenario is that GRB 100205A arose in the range 4 < z < 8. GRB 100205A is an example of a burst whose afterglow, even at ∼1 h post burst, could only be identified by 8-m class IR observations, and suggests that such observations of all optically dark bursts may be necessary to significantly enhance the number of high-redshift GRBs known.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".