MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094565398 · doi:10.3847/2515-5172/abc25a

Preliminary Target Selection for the DESI Bright Galaxy Survey (BGS)

2020· article· en· W3094565398 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Notes of the AAS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsRedshiftPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxySpurious relationshipAstronomySelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) will execute a nearly magnitude-limited survey of low redshift galaxies (0.05 ≤ z ≤ 0.4, median z ≈ 0.2). Clustering analyses of this Bright Galaxy Survey (BGS) will yield the most precise measurements to date of baryon acoustic oscillations and redshift-space distortions at low redshift. DESI BGS will comprise two target classes: (i) BRIGHT ( r < 19.5 mag), and (ii) FAINT (19.5 < r < 20 mag). Here we present a summary of the star-galaxy separation, and different photometric and geometrical masks, used in BGS to reduce the number of spurious targets. The selection results in a total density of ∼800 objects deg −2 for the BRIGHT and ∼600 objects deg −2 for the FAINT selections. A full characterization of the BGS selection can be found in Ruiz-Macias et al.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.241 · 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