MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378471580 · doi:10.3847/2515-5172/acd7ef

Comparing the Photometric Calibration of DESI Imaging and Gaia Synthetic Photometry

2023· article· en· W4378471580 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Notes of the AAS · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHigh Energy PhysicsOffice of ScienceEuropean Space AgencyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)Photometric stereoCalibrationAstronomyRemote sensingPhysicsOpticsGeographyStarsReflectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The relative photometric calibration errors in the DESI Legacy Imaging Surveys (LS), which are used for DESI target selection, can leave imprints on the DESI target densities and bias the resulting cosmological measurements. We characterize the LS calibration systematics by comparing the LS stellar photometry with Gaia DR3 synthetic photometry. We find the stellar photometry of LS DR9 and Gaia has an rms difference of 4.7, 3.7, 4.4 mmag in DECam grz bands, respectively, when averaged over an angular scale of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mn>27</mml:mn> <mml:mo>′</mml:mo> </mml:math> . There are distinct spatial patterns in the photometric offset resembling the Gaia scan patterns (most notably in the synthesized g -band) which indicate systematics in the Gaia spectrophotometry, as well as honeycomb patterns due to LS calibration systematics. We also find large and smoothly varying photometric offsets at decl. &lt; −29.°25 in LS DR9 which are fixed in DR10.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.252 · 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