Weak lensing study of low mass groups: implications for Ω<sub><i>m</i></sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report on the first measurement of the average mass and mass-to-light ratio of galaxy groups by analysing the weak lensing signal induced by these systems. The Canadian Network for Observational Cosmology Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (CNOC2) allows the identification of a large number of groups at intermediate redshifts. For our analysis we use a sample of 50 groups which are selected on the basis of a careful dynamical analysis of group candidates. We detect a signal at the 99% confidence limit. The best fit singular isothermal sphere model yields an Einstein radius r E = 0″.72 ± 0″.29. This corresponds to a velocity dispersion of 〈σ 2 〉 1/2 = 274± +48 -59 km/s, which is in good agreement with the dynamical estimate. Under the assumption that the light traces the mass, we find an average mass-to-light ratio of 191 ± 83 h in the restframe B band. Unlike dynamical estimates, this result is insensitive to problems associated with determining group membership. We use the observed mass-to-light ratio to estimate the matter density of the universe, for which we find Ω m = 0.19 ± 0.10 (Ω Λ = 0), in good agreement with other recent estimates. For a closed universe (Ω m + Ω Λ = 1), we obtain Ω m = 0.13 ± 0.07.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".