MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324349229 · doi:10.1088/1538-3873/acb846

In-orbit Performance of the Near-infrared Spectrograph NIRSpec on the James Webb Space Telescope

2023· article· en· W4324349229 on OpenAlexaff
Torsten Böker, Tracy L. Beck, Stephan M. Birkmann, Giovanna Giardino, C. D. Keyes, Nimisha Kumari, James Muzerolle, Tim Rawle, Peter Zeidler, Yasin M. Abul-Huda, Catarina Alves de Oliveira, Santiago Arribas, Katie Bechtold, Rachana Bhatawdekar, Nina Bonaventura, A. J. Bunker, Alex J. Cameron, Stefano Carniani, S. Charlot, Mirko Curti, Néstor Espinoza, Pierre Ferruit, Marijn Franx, P. Jakobsen, Diane Karakla, M. López-Caniego, Nora Lützgendorf, R. Maiolino, Elena Manjavacas, A. P. Marston, S. H. Moseley, P. Ogle, Michele Perna, María Peña-Guerrero, Nor Pirzkal, Rachel Plesha, Charles Proffitt, Bernard J. Rauscher, Hans‐Walter Rix, Bruno Rodríguez Del Pino, Zafar Rustamkulov, Elena Sabbi, David K. Sing, M. Sirianni, Maurice te Plate, Leonardo Úbeda, G. M. Wahlgren, Emily Wislowski, Rai Wu, Chris J. Willott

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectrographJames Webb Space TelescopeOrbit (dynamics)PhysicsInfraredAstronomySpitzer Space TelescopeTelescopeSpectral lineAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Near-Infrared Spectrograph (NIRSpec) is one of the four focal plane instruments on the James Webb Space Telescope. In this paper, we summarize the in-orbit performance of NIRSpec, as derived from data collected during its commissioning campaign and the first few months of nominal science operations. More specifically, we discuss the performance of some critical hardware components such as the two NIRSpec Hawaii-2RG detectors, wheel mechanisms, and the microshutter array. We also summarize the accuracy of the two target acquisition procedures used to accurately place science targets into the slit apertures, discuss the current status of the spectrophotometric and wavelength calibration of NIRSpec spectra, and provide the “as measured” sensitivity in all NIRSpec science modes. Finally, we point out a few important considerations for the preparation of NIRSpec science programs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations177
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications of the Astronomical Society of the PacificSame topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesFrench-language works237,207