MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391986013 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1801

The boundary of cosmic filaments

2024· preprint· en· W4391986013 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Wang, Peng Wang, Hong Guo, Xi Kang, Noam I. Libeskind, Daniela Galárraga-Espinosa, Volker Springel, Rahul Kannan, Lars Hernquist, Rüdiger Pakmor, Haoran Yu, Sownak Bose, Quan Guo, César Hernández‐Aguayo

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsCOSMIC cancer databaseBoundary (topology)AstronomyPhysicsAstrobiologyTheoretical physicsAstrophysicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT For decades, the boundary of cosmic filaments has been a subject of debate. In this work, we determine the physically motivated radii of filaments by constructing stacked galaxy number density profiles around the filament spines. We find that the slope of the profile changes with distance to the filament spine, reaching its minimum at approximately 1 Mpc at $z=0$ in both state-of-the-art hydrodynamical simulations and observational data. This can be taken as the average value of the filament radius. Furthermore, we note that the average filament radius rapidly decreases from $z=4$ to 1, and then slightly increases. Moreover, we find that the radius of the filament depends on the length of the filament, the distance from the connected clusters, and the masses of the clusters. These results suggest a two-phase formation scenario of cosmic filaments. The filaments experienced rapid contraction before $z=1$, but their density distribution has remained roughly stable since then. The subsequent mass transport along the filaments to the connected clusters is likely to have contributed to the formation of the clusters themselves.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations33
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207