Weak lensing tomographic redshift distribution inference for the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program three-year shape catalogue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present posterior sample redshift distributions for the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program Weak Lensing three-year (HSC Y3) analysis. Using the galaxies’ photometry and spatial cross-correlations, we conduct a combined Bayesian Hierarchical Inference of the sample redshift distributions. The spatial cross-correlations are derived using a subsample of Luminous Red Galaxies (LRGs) with accurate redshift information available up to a photometric redshift of z < 1.2. We derive the photometry-based constraints using a combination of two empirical techniques calibrated on spectroscopic and multiband photometric data that cover a spatial subset of the shear catalogue. The limited spatial coverage induces a cosmic variance error budget that we include in the inference. Our cross-correlation analysis models the photometric redshift error of the LRGs to correct for systematic biases and statistical uncertainties. We demonstrate consistency between the sample redshift distributions derived using the spatial cross-correlations, the photometry, and the posterior of the combined analysis. Based on this assessment, we recommend conservative priors for sample redshift distributions of tomographic bins used in the three-year cosmological Weak Lensing analyses.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".