Model BOSS and eBOSS luminous red galaxies at 0.2 &lt; <i>z</i> &lt; 1.0 using SubHalo Abundance Matching with three parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT SubHalo Abundance Matching (SHAM) is an empirical method for constructing galaxy catalogues based on high-resolution N-body simulations. We apply SHAM on the UNIT simulation to simulate SDSS BOSS/eBOSS luminous red galaxies (LRGs) within a wide redshift range of 0.2 < $z$ < 1.0. Besides the typical SHAM scatter parameter σ, we include $v$smear and Vceil to take into account the redshift uncertainty and the galaxy incompleteness, respectively. These two additional parameters are critical for reproducing the observed 2PCF multipoles on 5–25$\, h^{-1}\, {\rm Mpc}$. The redshift uncertainties obtained from the best-fitting $v$smear agree with those measured from repeat observations for all SDSS LRGs except for the LOWZ sample. We explore several potential systematics but none of them can explain the discrepancy found in LOWZ. Our explanation is that the LOWZ galaxies might contain another type of galaxies that needs to be treated differently. The evolution of the measured σ and Vceil also reveals that the incompleteness of eBOSS galaxies decreases with the redshift. This is the consequence of the magnitude lower limit applied in eBOSS LRG target selection. Our SHAM also set upper limits for the intrinsic scatter of the galaxy–halo relation, given a complete galaxy sample: σint < 0.31 for LOWZ at 0.2 < $z$ < 0.33, σint < 0.36 for LOWZ at 0.33 < $z$ < 0.43, and σint < 0.46 for CMASS at 0.43 < $z$ < 0.51. The projected 2PCFs of our SHAM galaxies also agree with the observational ones on the 2PCF fitting range.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".