MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100528003 · doi:10.15781/t2d51w

Target Selection For The Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE)

2016· article· en· W3100528003 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryBrookhaven National LaboratoryUniversity of PortsmouthUniversity of California, Los AngelesMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónYork UniversityCarnegie Mellon UniversityUniversity of ArizonaOffice of ScienceUniversity of WashingtonAlfred P. Sloan FoundationCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityPrinceton UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityJet Propulsion LaboratoryAspen Center for PhysicsHarvard UniversityOhio State UniversityNew Mexico State UniversityYale UniversityVanderbilt UniversityNational Science FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsMilky WayBulgeRed clumpStarsObservatoryPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyGalaxyMetallicityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE) is a high-resolution infrared spectroscopic survey spanning all Galactic environments (i.e., bulge, disk, and halo), with the principal goal of constraining dynamical and chemical evolution models of the Milky Way. APOGEE takes advantage of the reduced effects of extinction at infrared wavelengths to observe the inner Galaxy and bulge at an unprecedented level of detail. The survey’s broad spatial and wavelength coverage enables users of APOGEE data to address numerous Galactic structure and stellar populations issues. In this paper we describe the APOGEE targeting scheme and document its various target classes to provide the necessary background and reference information to analyze samples of APOGEE data with awareness of the imposed selection criteria and resulting sample properties. APOGEE’s primary sample consists of ∼105 red giant stars, selected to minimize observational biases in age and metallicity. We present the methodology and considerations that drive the selection of this sample and evaluate the accuracy, efficiency, and caveats of the selection and sampling algorithms. We also describe additional target classes that contribute to the APOGEE sample, including numerous ancillary science programs, and we outline the targeting data that will be included in the public data releases.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations195
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences)Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207