Mass calibration of distant SPT galaxy clusters through expanded weak-lensing follow-up observations with <i>HST</i>, VLT, & Gemini-South
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Expanding from previous work, we present weak-lensing (WL) measurements for a total sample of 30 distant (zmedian = 0.93) massive galaxy clusters from the South Pole Telescope Sunyaev–Zel’dovich (SPT-SZ) Survey, measuring galaxy shapes in Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Advanced Camera for Surveys images. We remove cluster members and preferentially select z ≳ 1.4 background galaxies via V − I colour, employing deep photometry from VLT/FORS2 and Gemini-South/GMOS. We apply revised calibrations for the WL shape measurements and the source redshift distribution to estimate the cluster masses. In combination with earlier Magellan/Megacam results for lower-redshifts clusters, we infer refined constraints on the scaling relation between the SZ detection significance and the cluster mass, in particular regarding its redshift evolution. The mass scale inferred from the WL data is lower by a factor $0.76^{+0.10}_{-0.14}$ (at our pivot redshift z = 0.6) compared to what would be needed to reconcile a flat Planck νΛCDM cosmology (in which the sum of the neutrino masses is a free parameter) with the observed SPT-SZ cluster counts. In order to sensitively test the level of (dis-)agreement between SPT clusters and Planck, further expanded WL follow-up samples are needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".