Bibliographic record
Abstract
We apply a matched-filter cluster detection algorithm to the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey (CFHTLS) i-band data for the Deep-1, Deep-2, Deep-3 and Deep-4 fields covering a total of 4 square degrees. To test the implemented procedure we carry out simulations for assessing the frequency of noise peaks as well as estimate the recovery efficiency. We estimate that up to $z\sim0.7$ the catalogue is essentially complete for clusters of richness class $R \ga 1$. The recovered redshifts are in general overestimated by $\Delta z=0.1$ with a scatter of ${\sigma}_{\Delta z}\sim0.1$, except at redshifts $z \ga 1$ where the estimated redshifts are systematically underestimated. The constructed cluster candidate catalogue contains 162 detections over an effective area of 3.112 square degrees corresponding to a density of ~52.1 per square degree. The median estimated redshift of the candidates is $z=0.6$. The estimated noise frequency is $16.9\pm5.4$ detections per square degree. From visual inspection we identify systems that show a clear concentration of galaxies with similar colour. These systems have a density of ~20 per square degree.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".