Erratum: Atomic hydrogen in IllustrisTNG galaxies: the impact of environment parallelled with local 21-cm surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is an erratum to the paper by Stevens et al. (2019) titled ‘Atomic hydrogen in IllustrisTNG galaxies: the impact of environment parallelled with local 21-cm surveys’, which we hereafter refer to as the original paper. We also acknowledge a typographical error in Fig. B1 of the original paper. The y-axis was given units of M⊙ when it should have instead been unitless, as the quantity shown is (the logarithm of) a ratio. The corrected version is shown in Fig. 1. Update to Fig. B1 of the original paper. The only difference is the y-axis labels are now correctly unitless. The plots show the difference in neutral-hydrogen mass (top panel) and H i mass (bottom panel, assuming the Gnedin & Draine 2014 prescription) of central and satellite galaxies separately in TNG runs of lower resolution compared to the main TNG100 run, as a function of subhalo mass. Thick lines compare the medians from TNG100-2 and TNG100-3 to that of TNG100-1. Thin lines compare the 16th and 84th percentiles of TNG100-2 and TNG100-3 to the median of TNG100-1.
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 | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.038 |
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".