Combining the CLAUDS and HSC-SSP surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the combination of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CHFT) Large Area U -bands Deep Survey (CLAUDS) and the Hyper-Suprime-Cam (HSC) Subaru Strategic Program (HSC-SSP) data over their four deep fields. We provide photometric catalogs for u, u * (CFHT-MegaCam), g , r, i, z , and y (Subaru-HSC) bands over ~20 deg 2 , complemented in two fields by data from the Visible and Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy (VISTA) Deep Extragalactic Observations (VIDEO) survey and the UltraVISTA survey, thus extending the wavelength coverage toward near-infrared with VIRCAM Y, J, H , and K s observations over 5.5 deg 2 . The extraction of the photometry was performed with two different softwares: the HSC pipeline hscPipe and the standard and robust SExtractor software. Photometric redshifts were computed with template-fitting methods using the new Phosphoros code for the hscPipe photometry and the well-known Le Phare code for the SExtractor photometry. The products of these methods were compared with each other in detail. We assessed their quality using the large spectroscopic sample available in those regions, together with photometry and photometric redshifts from COSMOS2020, the latest version of the Cosmic Evolution Survey catalogs. We find that both photometric data sets are in good agreement in Ugrizy down to magnitude ~26, and to magnitude ~24.5 in the YJHK s bands. We achieve good performance for the photometric redshifts, reaching precisions of σ NMAD ≲ 0.04 down to m i ~ 25, even using only the CLAUDS and HSC bands. At the same magnitude limit, we measured an outlier fraction of η ≲ 10% when using the Ugrizy bands, and down to η ≲ 6% when considering near-infrared data. The hscPipe plus Phosphoros pipeline performs slightly worse in terms of photometric-redshifts precision and outlier fraction than its SExtractor plus Le Phare counterpart, which has essentially been tracked down to differences in the photometry. Thus, this work is also a validation of the Phosphoros code. The photometric catalogs with the data and photometric redshifts from the two pipelines are presented and made publicly available.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".