<i>Swift</i>/UVOT follow-up of gravitational wave alerts in the O3 era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this paper, we report on the observational performance of the Swift Ultra-violet/Optical Telescope (UVOT) in response to the gravitational wave (GW) alerts announced by the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory and the Advanced Virgo detector during the O3 period. We provide the observational strategy for follow-up of GW alerts and provide an overview of the processing and analysis of candidate optical/UV sources. For the O3 period, we also provide a statistical overview and report on serendipitous sources discovered by Swift/UVOT. Swift followed 18 GW candidate alerts, with UVOT observing a total of 424 deg2. We found 27 sources that changed in magnitude at the 3σ level compared with archival u- or g-band catalogued values. Swift/UVOT also followed up a further 13 sources reported by other facilities during the O3 period. Using catalogue information, we divided these 40 sources into five initial classifications: 11 candidate active galactic nuclei (AGNs)/quasars, three cataclysmic variables (CVs), nine supernovae, 11 unidentified sources that had archival photometry, and six uncatalogued sources for which no archival photometry was available. We have no strong evidence to identify any of these transients as counterparts to the GW events. The 17 unclassified sources are likely a mix of AGN and a class of fast-evolving transient, and one source may be a CV.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".