MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104211357 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1303.5066

Planck 2013 results. V. LFI calibration

2013· article· en· W3104211357 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

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsPlanckCalibrationAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss the methods employed to photometrically calibrate the data acquired by the Low Frequency Instrument on Planck. Our calibration is based on a combination of the Orbital Dipole plus the Solar Dipole, caused respectively by the motion of the Planck spacecraft with respect to the Sun and by motion of the Solar System with respect to the CMB rest frame. The latter provides a signal of a few mK with the same spectrum as the CMB anisotropies and is visible throughout the mission. In this data release we rely on the characterization of the Solar Dipole as measured by WMAP. We also present preliminary results (at 44GHz only) on the study of the Orbital Dipole, which agree with the WMAP value of the Solar System speed within our uncertainties. We compute the calibration constant for each radiometer roughly once per hour, in order to keep track of changes in the detectors' gain. Since non-idealities in the optical response of the beams proved to be important, we implemented a fast convolution algorithm which considers the full beam response in estimating the signal generated by the dipole. Moreover, in order to further reduce the impact of residual systematics due to sidelobes, we estimated time variations in the calibration constant of the 30GHz radiometers (the ones with the largest sidelobes) using the signal of a reference load. We have estimated the calibration accuracy in two ways: we have run a set of simulations to assess the impact of statistical errors and systematic effects in the instrument and in the calibration procedure, and we have performed a number of consistency checks on the data and on the brightness temperature of Jupiter. Calibration errors for this data release are expected to be about 0.6% at 44 and 70 GHz, and 0.8% at 30 GHz. (Abriged.)

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.748
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.200 · 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