MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098901056

Weak lensing magnification of SpARCS galaxy clusters

2017· article· en· W3098901056 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxy clusterGalaxyWeak gravitational lensingCluster (spacecraft)Gravitational lensContext (archaeology)Photometric redshiftAstronomyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. Measuring and calibrating relations between cluster observables is critical for resource-limited studies. The mass–richness relation of clusters offers an observationally inexpensive way of estimating masses. Its calibration is essential for cluster and cosmological studies, especially for high-redshift clusters. Weak gravitational lensing magnification is a promising and complementary method to shear studies, that can be applied at higher redshifts.\nAims. We aim to employ the weak lensing magnification method to calibrate the mass–richness relation up to a redshift of 1.4. We used the Spitzer Adaptation of the Red-Sequence Cluster Survey (SpARCS) galaxy cluster candidates (0.2 < z < 1.4) and optical data from the Canada France Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) to test whether magnification can be effectively used to constrain the mass of high-redshift clusters.\nMethods. Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs) selected using the u-band dropout technique and their colours were used as a background sample of sources. LBG positions were cross-correlated with the centres of the sample of SpARCS clusters to estimate the magnification signal, which was optimally-weighted using an externally-calibrated LBG luminosity function. The signal was measured for cluster sub-samples, binned in both redshift and richness.\nResults. We measured the cross-correlation between the positions of galaxy cluster candidates and LBGs and detected a weak lensing magnification signal for all bins at a detection significance of 2.6–5.5σ. In particular, the significance of the measurement for clusters with z> 1.0 is 4.1σ; for the entire cluster sample we obtained an average M200 of 1.28 -0.21+0.23 × 1014 M⊙.\nConclusions. Our measurements demonstrated the feasibility of using weak lensing magnification as a viable tool for determining the average halo masses for samples of high redshift galaxy clusters. The results also established the success of using galaxy over-densities to select massive clusters at z > 1. Additional studies are necessary for further modelling of the various systematic effects we discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.216 · 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