MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7019038668

First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole

2019· article· en· W7019038668 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLeiden Repository (Leiden University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaIstituto Nazionale di Fisica NucleareRecruitment Program of Global ExpertsOffice of International Science and EngineeringMax-Planck-GesellschaftNational Research Foundation of KoreaGeneralitat ValencianaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekChinese Academy of SciencesNational Institutes of Natural SciencesNuclear Safety and Security CommissionGordon and Betty Moore FoundationLeverhulme TrustNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Research FoundationInternational Max Planck Research School for Environmental, Cellular and Molecular MicrobiologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Radio Astronomy ObservatoryNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSupermassive black holeEvent horizonShadow (psychology)Black hole (networking)TelescopeEvent (particle physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.014

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueLeiden Repository (Leiden University)Same topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207