MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409665770 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/056

The gravitational wave bias parameter from angular power spectra: bridging between galaxies and binary black holes

2025· article· en· W4409665770 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Dehghani, J. Leo Kim, Dorsa Sadat Hosseini, Alex Krolewski, Suvodip Mukherjee, Ghazal Geshnizjani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityArthur B. McDonald-Canadian Astroparticle Physics Research InstitutePerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsBinary black holeGravitational waveGalaxyBinary numberSpectral lineAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study presents the modeling of the gravitational wave (GW) bias parameter by bridging a connection between simulated GW sources and galaxies in low redshift galaxy surveys 2MPZ and WISExSCOS (WISC). We study this connection by creating a mock GW catalog, populating galaxy surveys with binary black holes (BBHs) for different scenarios of the GW host-galaxy probability as a function of the galaxy stellar mass. We probe the observable consequences of this connection by exploring the spatial clustering of the GW sources in terms of the GW bias parameter. We consider a phenomenological broken power law model for the host-galaxy probability function, with a potential turnover M𝒦 at high stellar mass (1011 M⊙ in the fiducial model) where the star formation efficiency begins to drop. We vary the parameters of the GW host-galaxy probability function and find that generically the GW bias increases as M𝒦 increases (and gets suppressed as M𝒦 decreases). The change in the GW bias parameter shows a maximum change of about 30% for different scenarios explored in this work in comparison to the galaxy bias. Future measurements of the GW bias can help constrain M𝒦 and the slopes of the host-galaxy probability function and thus offer insights into the underlying astrophysical processes.

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)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicPulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchFrench-language works237,207