MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410105147 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202554189

Quantifying the detectability of Milky Way satellites with image simulations: Case study with KiDS

2025· article· en· W4410105147 on OpenAlexaff
Shiyang Zhang, H. Hildebrandt, E. Suzanne Smith, M. Gatto, M. Dall’Ora, C. Tortora, Shangrong Li, Dominik Elsässer

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMilky WayAstrophysicsAstronomyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultra-faint dwarf galaxies, which can be detected as resolved satellite systems of the Milky Way, are critical to our understanding of galaxy formation, evolution, and the nature of dark matter, as they are the oldest, smallest, most metal-poor, and most dark matter-dominated stellar systems known thus far. Quantifying the sensitivity of surveys is essential to investigating their capability and limitations in searching for ultra-faint satellites. In this paper, we present the first study of the image-level observational selection function for Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS) based on the Synthetic UniveRses For Surveys ( SURFS ) based on KiDS Legacy-like simulations. We generated mock satellites and simulated images that included resolved stellar populations of the mock satellites and the background galaxies, capturing realistic observational effects such as source blending, photometric uncertainties, and star-galaxy separation. We applied the matched-filter method to recover the injected satellites. We derived the observational selection function of the survey in terms of the luminosity, half-light radius, and heliocentric distance of the satellites. Compared to the catalogue-level simulation typically used in previous studies, the image-level simulation provides a more realistic assessment of survey sensitivity, accounting for observational limitations that are neglected in catalogue-level simulations. The image-level simulation shows a detection loss for compact sources with a distance d ≳ 100 kpc. We argue that this is because compact sources are more likely to be identified as single sources, rather than being resolved during the source extraction process.

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)0.002
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207