MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4300481348 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020797

A QSO survey via optical variability and zero proper motion in the M 92 field

2002· article· en· W4300481348 on OpenAlexaff
H. Meusinger, J. Brunzendorf

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsNational Capital Commission
FundersCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsQSOSGalaxyAstrophysicsPhotometry (optics)PhysicsSpectral lineActive galactic nucleusQuasarProper motionLuminosityAstronomyStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a sample of 23 narrow-emission line galaxies (NELGs) which were selected by their strong variability as QSO candidates in the framework of a variability-and-proper motion QSO survey on digitised Schmidt plates. In previous work, we have shown that variability is an efficient method to find AGNs. The variability properties of the NELGs are however significantly different from those of the QSOs. The main aim of this paper is to clarify the nature of this variability and to estimate the fraction of AGN-dominated NELGs in this sample. New photometric and spectroscopic observations are presented, along with revised data from the photographic photometry. The originally measured high variability indices could not be confirmed. The diagnostic line-ratios of the NELG spectra are consistent with region-like spectra. No AGN could be proved, yet we cannot rule out the existence of faint low-luminosity AGNs masked by regions from intense star formation.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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