MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3042304712 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2571

The completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: GLAM-QPM mock galaxy catalogues for the emission line galaxy sample

2020· article· en· W3042304712 on OpenAlexaff
S. Y. Lin, Jeremy L. Tinker, Anatoly Klypin, Francisco Prada, Michael R. Blanton, Johan Comparat, Kyle Dawson, Arnaud de Mattia, Hélion du Mas des Bourboux, Will J. Percival, Anand Raichoor, Graziano Rossi, A. G. Smith, Cheng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónNational Research Foundation of KoreaSejong UniversityNational Science FoundationMinistry of Education, Science and TechnologyNew York University
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyRedshiftBaryonHaloBaryon acoustic oscillationsOscillation (cell signaling)Dark matter haloDark matterAstronomyGalaxy rotation curveGalaxy formation and evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present 2000 mock galaxy catalogues for the analysis of baryon acoustic oscillations (BAOs) in the Emission Line Galaxy (ELG) sample of the extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey Data Release 16 (eBOSS DR16). Each mock catalogue has a number density of $6.7 \times 10^{-4} h^3 \rm Mpc^{-3}$, covering a redshift range from 0.6 to 1.1. The mocks are calibrated to small-scale eBOSS ELG clustering measurements at scales of $\lesssim 30\, h^{-1}$Mpc. The mock catalogues are generated using a combination of GaLAxy Mocks (GLAM) simulations and the quick particle-mesh (QPM) method. GLAM simulations are used to generate the density field, which is then assigned dark matter haloes using the QPM method. Haloes are populated with galaxies using a halo occupation distribution. The resulting mocks match the survey geometry and selection function of the data, and have slightly higher number density that allows room for systematic analysis. The large-scale clustering of mocks at the BAO scale is consistent with data and we present the correlation matrix of the mocks.

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)0.004
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 score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→