MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972009598 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3e3a

A Simplified, Lossless Reanalysis of PAPER-64

2019· article· en· W2972009598 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Kolopanis, Daniel Jacobs, Carina Cheng, Aaron R. Parsons, Saul A. Kohn, Jonathan C. Pober, James Aguirre, Zaki S. Ali, G. Bernardi, Richard F. Bradley, C. L. Carilli, David R. DeBoer, Matthew R. Dexter, Joshua S. Dillon, Joshua Kerrigan, Pat Klima, Adrian Liu, David H. E. MacMahon, David F. Moore, Nithyanandan Thyagarajan, Chuneeta D. Nunhokee, William P. Walbrugh, Andre Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReionizationSpectral densityEstimatorRedshiftPhysicsAstrophysicsSidereal timeAlgorithmComputer scienceGalaxyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present limits on the 21 cm power spectrum from the Epoch of Reionization using data from the 64 antenna configuration of the Donald C. Backer Precision Array for Probing the Epoch of Reionization (PAPER) analyzed through a power spectrum pipeline independent from previous PAPER analyses. Previously reported results from PAPER have been found to contain significant signal loss. Several lossy steps from previous PAPER pipelines have not been included in this analysis, namely delay-based foreground filtering, optimal fringe-rate filtering, and empirical covariance-based estimators. Steps that remain in common with previous analyses include redundant calibration and local sidereal time (LST) binning. The power spectra reported here are effectively the result of applying a linear Fourier transform analysis to the calibrated, LST-binned data. This analysis also uses more data than previous publications, including the complete available redshift range of z ∼ 7.5 to 11. In previous PAPER analyses, many power spectrum measurements were found to be detections of noncosmological power at levels of significance ranging from two to hundreds of times the theoretical noise. Here, excess power is examined using redundancy between baselines and power spectrum jackknives. The upper limits we find on the 21 cm power spectrum from reionization are , , , , , and at redshifts z = 10.87, 9.93, 8.68, 8.37, 8.13, and 7.48, respectively. For reasons described in Cheng et al., these limits supersede all previous PAPER results.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations139
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207