MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111803049 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/abd411

DRAGraces: A Pipeline for the GRACES High-resolution Spectrograph at Gemini*

2021· article· en· W3111803049 on OpenAlexaffabout
André-Nicolas Chené, Shunyuan Mao, M. Lundquist, Eder Martioli, Jeffrey L. Carlin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPipeline (software)SpectrographDragSpectral linePipeline transportTelescopeAstronomyAstrophysicsComputer scienceMechanical engineeringProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the software Data Reduction and Analysis for GRACES (DRAGraces), which is a pipeline reducing spectra from Gemini Remote Access to the CFHT ESPaDOnS Spectrograph (GRACES) at the Gemini North Telescope. The code is written in the IDL language. It is designed to find all the GRACES frames in a given directory, automatically determine the list of bias, flat, arc, and science frames, and perform the whole reduction and extraction within a few minutes. We compare the output from DRAGraces with that of the Open source Pipeline for ESPaDOnS Reduction and Analysis (OPERA), a pipeline developed at the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) that also can extract GRACES spectra. Both pipelines were developed completely independently, yet they give very similar extracted spectra. They both have their advantages and disadvantages. For instance, DRAGraces is more straightforward and easy to use and is less likely to be derailed by a parameter that needs to be tweaked, while OPERA offers a more careful extraction that can be significantly superior when the highest resolution is required and when the signal-to-noise ratio is low. One should compare both before deciding which one to use for their science. Yet, both pipelines deliver a fairly comparable resolution power (R ∼ 52.8k and 36.6k for DRAGraces and R ∼ 58k and 40k for OPERA in high- and low-resolution spectral modes, respectively), wavelength solution, and signal-to-noise ratio per resolution element.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.025

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207