Euclid preparation. Observational expectations for redshift z<7 active galactic nuclei in the Euclid Wide and Deep surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We forecast the expected population of active galactic nuclei (AGN) observable in the Euclid Wide Survey (EWS) and Euclid Deep Survey (EDS). Starting from an X-ray luminosity function (XLF) we generate volume-limited samples of the AGN expected in the survey footprints. Each AGN is assigned an SED appropriate for its X-ray luminosity and redshift, with perturbations sampled from empirical distributions. The photometric detectability of each AGN is assessed via mock observation of the assigned SED. We estimate 40 million AGN will be detectable in at least one band in the EWS and 0.24 million in the EDS, corresponding to surface densities of 2.8$\times$10$^{3}$ deg$^{-2}$ and 4.7$\times$10$^{3}$ deg$^{-2}$. Employing colour selection criteria on our simulated data we select a sample of 4.8$\times$10$^{6}$ (331 deg$^{-2}$) AGN in the EWS and 1.7$\times$10$^{4}$ (346 deg$^{-2}$) in the EDS, amounting to 10% and 8% of the AGN detectable in the EWS and EDS. Including ancillary Rubin/LSST bands improves the completeness and purity of AGN selection. These data roughly double the total number of selected AGN to comprise 21% and 15% of the detectable AGN in the EWS and EDS. The total expected sample of colour-selected AGN contains 6.0$\times$10$^{6}$ (74%) unobscured AGN and 2.1$\times$10$^{6}$ (26%) obscured AGN, covering $0.02 \leq z \lesssim 5.2$ and $43 \leq \log_{10} (L_{bol} / erg s^{-1}) \leq 47$. With this simple colour selection, expected surface densities are already comparable to the yield of modern X-ray and mid-infrared surveys of similar area. The relative uncertainty on our expectation for detectable AGN is 6.7% for the EWS and 12.5% for the EDS, driven by the uncertainty of the XLF.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.137 | 0.120 |
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".