MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406772821 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ada1d3

Cosmic Reionization on Computers: The Evolution of the Ionizing Background and Mean Free Path

2025· article· en· W4406772821 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiawen 稼问 Fan 樊, Huanqing Chen, Camille Avestruz, Affan Khadir

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReionizationPhysicsIonizing radiationMean free pathAstronomyCOSMIC cancer databaseAstrophysicsCosmic rayBackground radiationIntergalactic mediumNuclear physicsRadiationGalaxyRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observations of the end stages of reionization indicate that at z ≈ 5–6, the ionizing background is not uniform and the mean free path (MFP) changes drastically. As the MFP is closely related to the distribution of Lyman-limit systems (LLSs) and damped Lyα absorbers, it is important to understand them. In this study, we utilize the Cosmic Reionization on Computers (CROC) simulations, which have both sufficient spatial resolution to resolve galaxy formation and LLSs alongside a fully coupled radiative transfer, to simulate the reionization processes. We analyze two CROC boxes with distinct reionization histories and find that the distributions of the ionizing background in both simulations display significant skewness. Further, the ionizing background in the late-reionization box still displays significant fluctuations (∼40%) at z ≈ 5. We also measure the MFP along sightlines that center on potential quasar hosting halos. The evolution of the MFP measured from these sightlines exhibits a break that coincides with the disappearance of all the neutral islands in the reionization history of each box. In the absence of LLSs, the MFP will be biased high by ≈20% at z ≈ 5. We also compare the MFPs measured in random sightlines. We find that at z ≈ 5, the MFPs measured in sightlines that start from massive halos are systematically smaller by ≈10% compared with the MFPs measured in random sightlines. We attribute this difference to the concentration of dense structures within 1 pMpc of massive halos. Our findings highlight the importance of high-fidelity models in the interpretation of observational measurements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicCosmology and Gravitation Theories→French-language works237,207→