The BLAST Observatory: A Sensitivity Study for Far-IR Balloon-borne Polarimeters
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sensitive wide-field observations of polarized thermal emission from interstellar dust grains will allow astronomers to address key outstanding questions about the life cycle of matter and energy driving the formation of stars and the evolution of galaxies. Stratospheric balloon-borne telescopes can map this polarized emission at far-infrared wavelengths near the peak of the dust thermal spectrum—wavelengths that are inaccessible from the ground. In this paper we address the sensitivity achievable by a Super Pressure Balloon polarimetry mission, using as an example the Balloon-borne Large Aperture Submillimeter Telescope (BLAST) Observatory. By launching from Wanaka, New Zealand, the BLAST Observatory can obtain a 30 days flight with excellent sky coverage—overcoming limitations of past experiments that suffered from short flight duration and/or launch sites with poor coverage of nearby star-forming regions. This proposed polarimetry mission will map large regions of the sky at sub-arcminute resolution, with simultaneous observations at 175, 250, and 350 μ m, using a total of 8274 microwave kinetic inductance detectors. Here, we describe the scientific motivation for the BLAST Observatory, the proposed implementation, and the forecasting methods used to predict its sensitivity. We also compare our forecasted experiment sensitivity with other facilities.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it