Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: calibration of lens sample redshift distributions using clustering redshifts with BOSS/eBOSS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present clustering redshift measurements for Dark Energy Survey (DES) lens sample galaxies used in weak gravitational lensing and galaxy clustering studies. To perform these measurements, we cross-correlate with spectroscopic galaxies from the Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Survey (BOSS) and its extension, eBOSS. We validate our methodology in simulations, including a new technique to calibrate systematic errors that result from the galaxy clustering bias, and we find that our method is generally unbiased in calibrating the mean redshift. We apply our method to the data, and estimate the redshift distribution for 11 different photometrically selected bins. We find general agreement between clustering redshift and photometric redshift estimates, with differences on the inferred mean redshift found to be below |Δz| = 0.01 in most of the bins. We also test a method to calibrate a width parameter for redshift distributions, which we found necessary to use for some of our samples. Our typical uncertainties on the mean redshift ranged from 0.003 to 0.008, while our uncertainties on the width ranged from 4 to 9 per cent. We discuss how these results calibrate the photometric redshift distributions used in companion papers for DES Year 3 results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".