MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3125600280

3D-Matched-Filter Galaxy Cluster Finder I: Selection Functions and CFHTLS Deep Clusters

2009· article· en· W3125600280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCluster (spacecraft)AstrophysicsGalaxyGalaxy clusterSelection (genetic algorithm)Brightest cluster galaxyAstronomyFilter (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceComputer vision
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an optimised galaxy cluster nder, 3D-Matched-Filter (3D-MF), that utilises galaxy cluster radial proles, luminosity functions and redshift information to detect galaxy clusters in optical surveys. This method is an improvement over other matched-lter methods, most notably through implementing redshift slicing of the data to signicantly reduce line-of-sight projections and related false positives. We apply our method to the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey Deep elds, nding 170 galaxy clusters per square degree in the 0:2 6 z 6 1:0 redshift range. Future surveys such as LSST and JDEM can exploit 3D-MF's automated method-ology to produce complete and reliable galaxy cluster catalogues. We determine the reliability and accuracy of the statistical approach of our method through a thorough analysis of mock data from the Millennium Simulation. We detect clusters with 100% completeness for M200> 3:0 10 14M, 88 % completeness for M200> 1:0 10 14M,

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations40
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→