MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202392175 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac4246

First Evidence of Intrinsic Alignments of Red Galaxies at z > 1: Cross Correlation between CFHTLenS and FastSound Samples

2021· article· en· W3202392175 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Motonari Tonegawa, Teppei Okumura

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrelationMathematicsAstrophysicsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report the first evidence for intrinsic alignment (IA) of red galaxies at z > 1. We measure the gravitational shear-intrinsic ellipticity cross correlation function at z ∼ 1.3 using galaxy positions from the FastSound spectroscopic survey and galaxy shapes from the Canada France Hawaii telescope lensing survey data. Adopting the nonlinear alignment model, we obtain a 2.4σ level detection of the IA amplitude A LA = 27.48 − 11.54 + 11.53 (and 2.6σ with A LA = 29.43 − 11.49 + 11.48 when weak lensing contaminations are taken into account), which is larger than the value extrapolated from the constraints obtained at lower redshifts. Our measured IA is translated into a ∼20% contamination of the weak-lensing power spectrum for the red galaxies. This marginal detection of IA for red galaxies at z > 1 motivates the continuing investigation of the nature of IA for weak lensing studies. Furthermore, our result provides the first step to utilize IA measurements in future high-z surveys as a cosmological probe, complementary to galaxy clustering and lensing.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207