MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217440745 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1c03

3-OGC: Catalog of Gravitational Waves from Compact-binary Mergers

2021· article· en· W3217440745 on OpenAlexaff
A. Nitz, C. D. Capano, S. Kumar, Yifan Wang, Shilpa Kastha, Marlin B. Schäfer, Rahul Dhurkunde, M. Cabero

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsDatabaseLIGOBinary numberAlgorithmGravitational waveAstrophysicsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the third open gravitational-wave catalog (3-OGC) of compact-binary coalescences, based on the analysis of the public LIGO and Virgo data from 2015 through 2019 (O1, O2, O3a). Our updated catalog includes a population of 57 observations, including 4 binary black hole mergers that had not been previously reported. This consists of 55 binary black hole mergers and the 2 binary neutron star mergers, GW170817 and GW190425. We find no additional significant binary neutron star or neutron star–black hole merger events. The most confident new detection is the binary black hole merger GW190925_232845, which was observed by the LIGO–Hanford and Virgo observatories with  astro > 0.99 ; its primary and secondary component masses are 20.2 − 2.5 + 3.9 M ⊙ and 15.6 − 2.6 + 2.1 M ⊙ , respectively. We estimate the parameters of all binary black hole events using an up-to-date waveform model that includes both subdominant harmonics and precession effects. To enable deep follow up as our understanding of the underlying populations evolves, we make available our comprehensive catalog of events, including the subthreshold population of candidates, and the posterior samples of our source parameter estimates.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0170.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations196
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207