MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417298693 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555583

TDCOSMO

2025· article· en· W4417298693 on OpenAlexaff
Pritom Mozumdar, Shawn Knabel, Tommaso Treu, Alessandro Sonnenfeld, Anowar J. Shajib, Michele Cappellari, Carlo Nipoti

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersGordon and Betty Moore FoundationNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGalaxyCovarianceFundamental plane (elliptical galaxies)Velocity dispersionScalingLens (geology)Stellar massSpectral lineSystematic error

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We reanalyzed spectra that were taken as part of the SL2S lens galaxy survey with the goal to obtain the stellar velocity dispersion with a precision and accuracy sufficient for time-delay cosmography. In order to achieve this goal, we imposed stringent cuts on the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N), and employed recently developed methods to mitigate and quantify residual systematic errors that are transferred from template libraries and fitting process. We also quantified the covariance across the sample. For galaxy spectra with S/N > 20/Å, our new measurements have an average random uncertainty of 3–4%, an average systematic uncertainty of 2%, and a covariance across the sample of 1%. We find a negligible covariance between spectra taken with different instruments. The systematic uncertainty and covariance need to be included when the sample is used as an external dataset in time-delay cosmography. We revisited empirical scaling relations of lens galaxies based on the improved kinematics. We show that the SL2S sample, the TDCOSMO time-delay lens sample, and the lower-redshift SLACS sample follow the same correlation of the effective radius, stellar velocity dispersion, and lensing mass, known as the lensing-mass fundamental plane, as the previously derived correlation that assumed isothermal mass profiles for the deflectors. We also derived for the first time the lensing-mass fundamental plane assuming free power-law mass density profiles, and we show that the three samples also follow the same correlation. This is consistent with a scenario in which massive galaxies evolve by growing their radii and mass, but stay within the plane.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.043

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→