MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3210133581 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3064

SKAO H <scp>i</scp> intensity mapping: blind foreground subtraction challenge

2021· article· en· W3210133581 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marta Spinelli, Isabella P. Carucci, Steven Cunnington, Stuart Harper, Melis O Irfan, José Fonseca, Alkistis Pourtsidou, Laura Wolz

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilInstitut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments FonctionnelsUniversità degli Studi di Padova
KeywordsPhysicsIntensity mappingDeconvolutionBackground subtractionSpurious relationshipSkyTelescopeSubtractionNoise (video)Range (aeronautics)Beam (structure)AlgorithmOpticsAstrophysicsArtificial intelligenceRedshiftComputer scienceGalaxyPixel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Neutral Hydrogen Intensity Mapping (H i IM) surveys will be a powerful new probe of cosmology. However, strong astrophysical foregrounds contaminate the signal and their coupling with instrumental systematics further increases the data cleaning complexity. In this work, we simulate a realistic single-dish H i IM survey of a 5000 deg2 patch in the 950–1400 MHz range, with both the MID telescope of the SKA Observatory (SKAO) and MeerKAT, its precursor. We include a state-of-the-art H i simulation and explore different foreground models and instrumental effects such as non-homogeneous thermal noise and beam side lobes. We perform the first Blind Foreground Subtraction Challenge for H i IM on these synthetic data cubes, aiming to characterize the performance of available foreground cleaning methods with no prior knowledge of the sky components and noise level. Nine foreground cleaning pipelines joined the challenge, based on statistical source separation algorithms, blind polynomial fitting, and an astrophysical-informed parametric fit to foregrounds. We devise metrics to compare the pipeline performances quantitatively. In general, they can recover the input maps’ two-point statistics within 20 per cent in the range of scales least affected by the telescope beam. However, spurious artefacts appear in the cleaned maps due to interactions between the foreground structure and the beam side lobes. We conclude that it is fundamental to develop accurate beam deconvolution algorithms and test data post-processing steps carefully before cleaning. This study was performed as part of SKAO preparatory work by the H i IM Focus Group of the SKA Cosmology Science Working Group.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations69
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology→French-language works237,207→