MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4298204673 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321112

SARCS strong-lensing galaxy groups

2013· article· en· W4298204673 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Foëx, V. Motta, Marceau Limousin, T. Verdugo, Anupreeta More, R. Cabanac, R. Gavazzi, Roberto P. Muñoz

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaDanmarks GrundforskningsfondCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNational Research Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsWeak gravitational lensingGalaxyStrong gravitational lensingLuminosityGalaxy groupGravitational lensAstronomyRADIUSGalaxy clusterRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the weak-lensing and optical analysis of the SL2S-ARCS (SARCS) sample of strong-lensing candidates. The sample is based on the Strong Lensing Legacy Survey (SL2S), a systematic search of strong-lensing systems in the photometric Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey (CFHTLS). The SARCS sample focusses on arc-like features and is designed to contain mostly galaxy groups. We briefly present the weak-lensing methodology that we used to estimate the mass of the SARCS objects. Among 126 candidates, we obtained a weak-lensing detection (at the 1σ level) for 89 objects with velocity dispersions of the singular isothermal sphere mass model (SIS) ranging from σSIS ~ 350 km s-1 to ~1000 km s-1 with an average value of σSIS ~ 600 km s-1, corresponding to a rich galaxy group (or poor cluster). From the galaxies belonging to the bright end of the group’s red sequence (Mi < −21), we derived the optical properties of the SARCS candidates. We obtained typical richnesses of N ~ 5−15 galaxies and optical luminosities of L ~ 0.5−1.5 × 1012 L⊙ (within a radius of 0.5 Mpc). We used these galaxies to compute luminosity density maps, from which a morphological classification reveals that a large fraction of the sample (~45%) are groups with a complex light distribution, either elliptical or multi-modal, suggesting that these objects are dynamically young structures. We finally combined the lensing and optical analyses to define a sample of the 80 most secure group candidates, i.e. weak-lensing detection and over-density at the lens position in the luminosity map, to remove false detections and galaxy-scale systems from the initial sample. We use this reduced sample to probe the optical scaling relations in combination with a sample of massive galaxy clusters. We detect the expected correlations over the probed range in mass with a typical scatter of ~25% in σSIS at a given richness or luminosity, making these scaling laws interesting mass proxies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→