MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400495292 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad4888

Chronicling the Reionization History at 6 ≲ z ≲ 7 with Emergent Quasar Damping Wings

2024· article· en· W4400495292 on OpenAlexaff
Dominika Ďurovčíková, Anna–Christina Eilers, Huanqing Chen, Sindhu Satyavolu, Girish Kulkarni, Robert A. Simcoe, Laura C. Keating, Martin G. Haehnelt, Eduardo Bañados

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuasarPhysicsRedshiftReionizationAstrophysicsSpectral lineAstronomyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The spectra of high-redshift (z ≳ 6) quasars contain valuable information on the progression of the Epoch of Reionization. At redshifts z < 6, the observed Lyman-series forest shows that the intergalactic medium is nearly ionized, while at z > 7 the observed quasar damping wings indicate high neutral gas fractions. However, there remains a gap in neutral gas fraction constraints at 6 ≲ z ≲ 7 where the Lyman-series forest becomes saturated but damping wings have yet to fully emerge. In this work, we use a sample of 18 quasar spectra at redshifts 6.0 < z < 7.1 to close this gap. We apply neural networks to reconstruct the quasars’ continuum emission around the partially absorbed Lyα line to normalize their spectra, and stack these continuum-normalized spectra in three redshift bins. To increase the robustness of our results, we compare the stacks to a grid of models from two hydrodynamical simulations, ATON and CROC, and we measure the volume-averaged neutral gas fraction, x ¯ HI , while jointly fitting for the mean quasar lifetime, t Q, for each stacked spectrum. We chronicle the evolution of neutral gas fraction using the ATON (CROC) models as follows: x ¯ HI = 0.21 − 0.07 + 0.17 ( x ¯ HI = 0.10 < 10 − 4 + 0.73 ) at 〈z〉 = 6.10, x ¯ HI = 0.21 − 0.07 + 0.33 ( x ¯ HI = 0.57 − 0.47 + 0.26 ) at 〈z〉 = 6.46, and x ¯ HI = 0.37 − 0.17 + 0.17 (

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations49
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→