Selection function of clusters in Dark Energy Survey year 3 data from cross-matching with South Pole Telescope detections
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context. Galaxy clusters selected based on overdensities of galaxies in photometric surveys provide the largest cluster samples. However, modeling the selection function of such samples is complicated by noncluster members projected along the line of sight (projection effects) and the potential detection of unvirialized objects (contamination). Aims. We empirically constrained the magnitude of these effects by cross-matching galaxy clusters selected in the Dark Energy Survey data with the redMaPPer algorithm with significant detections in three South Pole Telescope surveys (SZ, pol-ECS, pol-500d). Methods. For matched clusters, we augmented the redMaPPer catalog with the SPT detection significance. For unmatched objects we used the SPT detection threshold as an upper limit on the SZe signature. Using a Bayesian population model applied to the collected multiwavelength data, we explored various physically motivated models to describe the relationship between observed richness and halo mass. Results. Our analysis reveals a clear preference for models with an additional skewed scatter component associated with projection effects over a purely log-normal scatter model. We rule out significant contamination by unvirialized objects at the high-richness end of the sample. While dedicated simulations offer a well-fitting calibration of projection effects, our findings suggest the presence of redshift-dependent trends that these simulations may not have captured. Our findings highlight that modeling the selection function of optically detected clusters remains a complicated challenge that requires a combination of simulation and data-driven approaches.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it