MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

First Results on Dark Matter Substructure from Astrometric Weak Lensing

2020· article· en· W3005167132 on OpenAlexaff
Cristina Mondino, Anna-Maria Taki, Ken Van Tilburg, Neal Weiner

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersEuropean Space AgencyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationSimons FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsDark matterAstrophysicsSubstructureMilky WayGravitational lensWeak gravitational lensingStarsSensitivity (control systems)BaryonGalaxyRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-mass structures of dark matter (DM) are expected to be entirely devoid of light-emitting regions and baryons. Precisely because of this lack of baryonic feedback, small-scale substructures of the Milky Way are a relatively pristine testing ground for discovering aspects of DM microphysics and primordial fluctuations on subgalactic scales. In this Letter, we report results from the first search for Galactic DM subhalos with time-domain astrometric weak gravitational lensing. The analysis is based on a matched-filter template of local lensing corrections to the proper motion of stars in the Magellanic Clouds. We describe a data analysis pipeline detailing sample selection, background subtraction, and the handling of outliers and other systematics. For tentative candidate lenses, we identify a signature based on an anomalous parallax template that can unequivocally confirm the presence of a DM lens, opening up prospects for robust discovery potential with full time-series data. We present our constraints on substructure fraction f_{l}≲5 at 90% C.L. (and f_{l}≲2 at 50% C.L.) for compact lenses with radii r_{l}<1 pc, with best sensitivity reached for lens masses M_{l} around 10^{7}-10^{8} M_{⊙}. Parametric improvements are expected with future astrometric datasets; by end of mission, Gaia could reach f_{l}≲10^{-3} for these massive point-like objects and be sensitive to lighter and/or more extended subhalos for O(1) substructure fractions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→