Euclid: Quick Data Release (Q1) -- A photometric search for ultracool dwarfs in the Euclid Deep Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a catalogue of 5306 new ultracool dwarf (UCD) candidates in the three Euclid Deep Fields in the Q1 data release. They range from late M to late T dwarfs, and include 1200 L and T dwarfs. A total of 546 objects have been spectroscopically confirmed, including 329 L dwarfs and 26 T dwarfs. We also provide empirical Euclid colours as a function of spectral type. Our UCD selection criteria are based only on colour ($I_\mathrm{E}-Y_\mathrm{E}>2.5$). The combined requirement for optical detection and stringent signal-to-noise ratio threshold ensure a high purity of the sample, but at the expense of completeness, especially for T dwarfs. The detections range from magnitudes 19 and 24 in the near-infrared bands, and extend down to 26 in the optical band. We discuss Euclid's capability to identify UCD candidates based on its photometric passbands. The average surface density of detected UCDs on the sky is approximately 100 objects per $\mathrm{deg}^2$, including 20 L and T dwarfs per $\mathrm{deg}^2$. This leads to an expectation of at least 1.4 million ultracool dwarfs in the final data release of the Euclid Wide Survey, including at least $300\,000$ L dwarfs, and more than 2600 T dwarfs, using the strict selection criteria from this work.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
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".