Dark Energy Survey: Galaxy sample for the baryonic acoustic oscillation measurement from the final dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present and validate the galaxy sample used for the analysis of the baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) signal in the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Y6 data. The definition is based on a color and redshift-dependent magnitude cut optimized to select galaxies at redshifts higher than 0.6, while ensuring a high-quality photo-$z$ determination. The optimization is performed using a Fisher forecast algorithm, finding the optimal $i$-magnitude cut to be given by $i<19.64+2.894{z}_{\mathrm{ph}}$. For the optimal sample, we forecast an increase in precision in the BAO measurement of $\ensuremath{\sim}25%$ with respect to the Y3 analysis. Our BAO sample has a total of 15,937,556 galaxies in the redshift range $0.6<{z}_{\mathrm{ph}}<1.2$, and its angular mask covers $4,273.42\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{deg}}^{2}$ to a depth of $i=22.5$. We validate its redshift distributions with three different methods: directional neighborhood fitting algorithm (DNF), which is our primary photo-$z$ estimation; direct calibration with spectroscopic redshifts from VIPERS, which is a spectroscopic galaxy sample that overlaps with our BAO sample and is complete within our selection cuts; and clustering redshift using SDSS galaxies. The fiducial redshift distribution is a combination of these three techniques performed by modifying the mean and width of the DNF distributions to match those of VIPERS and clustering redshift. In this paper, we also describe the methodology used to mitigate the effect of observational systematics, which is analogous to the one used in the Y3 analysis. This paper is one of the two dedicated to the analysis of the BAO signal in DES Y6. In its companion paper, we present the angular diameter distance constraints obtained through the fitting to the BAO scale.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.022 |
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".