How accurately can we measure Weak Gravitational Shear?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the recent detection of cosmic shear, the most challenging effect of weak gravitational lensing has been observed. The main difficulties for this detection were the need for a large amount of high quality data and the control of systematics during the gravitational shear measurement process, in particular those coming from the Point Spread Function anisotropy. In this paper we perform detailed simulations with the state-of-the-art algorithm developed by Kaiser, Squires and Broadhurst (KSB) to measure gravitational shear. We show that for realistic PSF profiles the KSB algorithm can recover any shear amplitude in the range $0.012 < |\\gammavec |<0.32$ with a relative error of $10-15%$. We give quantitative limits on the PSF correction method as a function of shear strength, object size, signal-to-noise and PSF anisotropy amplitude, and we provide an automatic procedure to get a reliable object catalog for shear measurements out of the raw images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it