Galaxy-multiplet clustering from DESI DR2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present an efficient estimator for higher order galaxy clustering using small groups of nearby galaxies, or multiplets. Using the Luminous Red Galaxy sample from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Data Release 2, we identify galaxy multiplets as discrete objects and measure their cross-correlations with the general galaxy field. Our results show that the multiplets exhibit stronger clustering bias as they trace more massive dark matter haloes than individual galaxies. When comparing the observed clustering statistics with the mock catalogues generated from the N-body simulation AbacusSummit, we find that the mocks underpredict multiplet clustering despite reproducing the galaxy two-point autocorrelation reasonably well. This discrepancy indicates that the standard Halo Occupation Distribution (HOD) model is insufficient to describe the properties of galaxy multiplets, revealing the greater constraining power of this higher order statistic on galaxy–halo connection and the possibility that multiplets are specific to additional assembly bias. We demonstrate that incorporating secondary biases into the HOD model improves agreement with the observed multiplet statistics, specifically by allowing galaxies to preferentially occupy haloes in denser environments. Our results highlight the potential of utilizing multiplet clustering, beyond traditional two-point correlation measurements, to break degeneracies in models describing the galaxy–dark matter connection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".