Nine lensed quasars and quasar pairs discovered through spatially extended variability in Pan-STARRS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the proof of concept of a method for finding strongly lensed quasars using their spatially extended photometric variability through difference imaging in cadenced imaging survey data. We applied the method to Pan-STARRS, starting with an initial selection of 14 107 Gaia multiplets with quasar-like infrared colours from WISE. We identified 229 candidates showing notable spatially extended variability during the Pan-STARRS survey period. These include 20 known lenses and an additional 12 promising candidates for which we obtained long-slit spectroscopy follow-up. This process resulted in the confirmation of four doubly lensed quasars, four unclassified quasar pairs, and one projected quasar pair. Only three are pairs of stars or quasar+star projections. The false-positive rate accordingly is 25%. The lens separations are between 0.81″ and 1.24″, and the source redshifts lie between z = 1.47 and z = 2.46. Three of the unclassified quasar pairs are promising dual-quasar candidates with separations ranging from 6.6 to 9.3 kpc. We expect that this technique is a particularly efficient way to select lensed variables in the upcoming Rubin -LSST, which will be crucial given the expected limitations for spectroscopic follow-up.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".