MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200050338 · doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ac260c

Final Targeting Strategy for the Sloan Digital Sky Survey IV Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment 2 North Survey

2021· article· en· W4200050338 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachael L. Beaton, Ryan J. Oelkers, Christian R. Hayes, Kevin R. Covey, Nathan De Lee, Jennifer Sobeck, Steven R. Majewski, Roger E. Cohen, José G. Fernández-Trincado, Penélope Longa-Peña, Julia O’Connell, Felipe A. Santana, Guy S. Stringfellow, Gail Zasowski, C. Aerts, Borja Anguiano, Chad F. Bender, Caleb I. Cañas, Kátia Cunha, John Donor, Scott W. Fleming, Peter M. Frinchaboy, Diane Feuillet, Paul Harding, Sten Hasselquist, Jon A. Holtzman, Jennifer A. Johnson, Juna A. Kollmeier, Marina Kounkel, Suvrath Mahadevan, Adrian M. Price-Whelan, Á. Rojas-Arriagada, C. Román-Zúñiga, Edward F. Schlafly, M. Schultheis, Matthew Shetrone, Joshua D. Simon, Keivan G. Stassun, Amelia M. Stutz, Jamie Tayar, Johanna Teske, A. Tkachenko, T. Nicholas, Franco D. Albareti, Dmitry Bizyaev, Jo Bovy, Adam J. Burgasser, Johan Comparat, Juan José Downes, D. Geisler, Laura Inno, A. Manchado, Melissa Ness, Marc H. Pinsonneault, Francisco Prada, Alexandre Roman–Lopes, G. Simonian, Verne V. Smith, Renbin Yan, O. Zamora

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaJohns Hopkins UniversityDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoEuropean Space AgencySmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryJet Propulsion LaboratoryCarnegie Institution for ScienceInstituto de Astrofísica de CanariasUniversity of Colorado BoulderOffice of ScienceMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieMax-Planck-Institut für AstrophysikNational Central UniversityEuropean Regional Development FundMax-Planck-GesellschaftKU LeuvenYork UniversityMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoQueen's UniversityEuropean CommissionUniversity of OxfordDurham UniversityQueen's University BelfastMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y UniversidadesUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoSpace Telescope Science InstituteLeibniz-GemeinschaftUniversity of Notre DameCarnegie Mellon UniversityUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of WashingtonPrinceton UniversityAlfred P. Sloan FoundationCarnegie Institution of WashingtonUniversity of PortsmouthNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of UtahOhio State UniversitySmithsonian InstitutionYale UniversityU.S. Department of EnergyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationVanderbilt UniversityBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeNational Science Foundation
KeywordsObservatorySkyComputer scienceMilky WayPoint (geometry)Survey data collectionGeographyGalaxyMathematicsAstronomyPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment 2 (APOGEE-2) is a dual-hemisphere, near-infrared (NIR), spectroscopic survey with the goal of producing a chemodynamical mapping of the Milky Way. The targeting for APOGEE-2 is complex and has evolved with time. In this paper, we present the updates and additions to the initial targeting strategy for APOGEE-2N presented in Zasowski et al. (2017). These modifications come in two implementation modes: (i) “Ancillary Science Programs” competitively awarded to Sloan Digital Sky Survey IV PIs through proposal calls in 2015 and 2017 for the pursuit of new scientific avenues outside the main survey, and (ii) an effective 1.5 yr expansion of the survey, known as the Bright Time Extension (BTX), made possible through accrued efficiency gains over the first years of the APOGEE-2N project. For the 23 distinct ancillary programs, we provide descriptions of the scientific aims, target selection, and how to identify these targets within the APOGEE-2 sample. The BTX permitted changes to the main survey strategy, the inclusion of new programs in response to scientific discoveries or to exploit major new data sets not available at the outset of the survey design, and expansions of existing programs to enhance their scientific success and reach. After describing the motivations, implementation, and assessment of these programs, we also leave a summary of lessons learned from nearly a decade of APOGEE-1 and APOGEE-2 survey operations. A companion paper, F. Santana et al. (submitted; AAS29036), provides a complementary presentation of targeting modifications relevant to APOGEE-2 operations in the Southern Hemisphere.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations96
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207