<i>Euclid</i> preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Galaxy proto-clusters are receiving increased interest since most of the processes shaping the structure of clusters of galaxies and their galaxy population happen at the early stages of their formation. The Euclid Survey will provide a unique opportunity to discover a large number of proto-clusters over a large fraction of the sky (14 500 deg2). In this paper, we explore the expected observational properties of proto-clusters in the Euclid Wide Survey by means of theoretical models and simulations. We provide an overview of the predicted proto-cluster extent, galaxy density profiles, mass-richness relations, abundance, and sky-filling as a function of redshift. Useful analytical approximations for the functions of these properties are provided. The focus is on the redshift range z = 1.5 − 4. In particular we discuss the density contrast with which proto-clusters can be observed against the background in the galaxy distribution if photometric galaxy redshifts are used as supplied by the ESA Euclid mission together with the ground-based photometric surveys. We show that the obtainable detection significance is sufficient to find large numbers of interesting proto-cluster candidates. For quantitative studies, additional spectroscopic follow-up is required to confirm the proto-clusters and establish their richness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.160 | 0.159 |
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".