MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extracting H

2015· article· en· W6903540246 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryYork UniversityOffice of ScienceJohns Hopkins UniversityCarnegie Mellon UniversityCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityHarvard UniversityOhio State UniversityNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonAlfred P. Sloan FoundationNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of PortsmouthVanderbilt UniversityYale UniversityPrinceton UniversityBrookhaven National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsFlux (metallurgy)Filter (signal processing)Extinction (optical mineralogy)Photometry (optics)GalaxySpectral line

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims. We present the main steps that will be taken to extract Hα emission flux from Javalambre Photometric Local Universe Survey (J-PLUS) photometric data. Methods. For galaxies with z ≲ 0.015, the Hα+[N ii] emission is covered by the J-PLUS narrow-band filter F660. We explore three different methods to extract the Hα + [N ii] flux from J-PLUS photometric data: a combination of a broad-band and a narrow-band filter (r′ and F660), two broad-band and a narrow-band filter (r′, i′ and F660), and an SED-fitting based method using eight photometric points. To test these methodologies, we simulated J-PLUS data from a sample of 7511 SDSS spectra with measured Hα flux. Based on the same sample, we derive two empirical relations to correct the derived Hα+[N ii] flux from dust extinction and [N ii] contamination. Results. We find that the only unbiased method is the SED-fitting based method. The combination of two filters underestimates the measurements of the Hα + [N ii] flux by 22%, while the three filters method are underestimated by 9%. We study the error budget of the SED-fitting based method and find that, in addition to the photometric error, our measurements have a systematic uncertainty of 4.3%. Several sources contribute to this uncertainty: the differences between our measurement procedure and that used to derive the spectroscopic values, the use of simple stellar populations as templates, and the intrinsic errors of the spectra, which were not taken into account. Apart from that, the empirical corrections for dust extinction and [N ii] contamination add an extra uncertainty of 14%. Conclusions. Given the J-PLUS photometric system, the best methodology to extract Hα + [N ii] flux is the SED-fitting based method. Using this method, we are able to recover reliable Hα fluxes for thousands of nearby galaxies in a robust and homogeneous way. Moreover, each stage of the process (emission line flux, dust extinction correction, and [N ii] decontamination) can be decoupled and improved in the future. This method ensures reliable Hα measurements for many studies of galaxy evolution, from the local star formation rate density, to 2D studies in spatially well-resolved galaxies or the study of environmental effects, up to mr′ = 21.8 (AB; 3σ detection of Hα+[N ii] emission).

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.042

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207