MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The radio source population at high frequency: follow-up of the 15-GHz 9C survey

2004· preprint· en· W6929310434 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadio spectrumPopulationRadio frequencySpectral lineCompleteness (order theory)Quarter (Canadian coin)Radio astronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have carried out extensive radio and optical follow-up of 176 sources from the 15 GHz 9th Cambridge survey. Optical identifications have been found for 155 of the radio sources; optical images are given with radio maps overlaid. The continuum radio spectrum of each source spanning the frequency range 1.4 - 43 GHz is also given. Two flux-limited samples are defined, one containing 124 sources complete to 25 mJy and one of 70 sources complete to 60 mJy. Between one fifth and one quarter of sources from these flux-limited samples display convex radio spectra, rising between 1.4 and 4.8 GHz. These rising-spectrum sources make up a much larger fraction of the radio source population at this high selection frequency than in lower frequency surveys. We find that by using non-simultaneous survey flux density measurements at 1.4 and 15 GHz to remove steep spectrum objects, the efficiency of selecting objects with spectra rising between 1.4 and 4.8 GHz (as seen in simultaneous measurements) can be raised to 49 percent without compromising the completeness of the rising spectrum sample.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.126 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicMental Health Research Topics→French-language works237,207→