Planck 2015 results I. Overview of products and scientific results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Planck is a project of the European Space Agency in cooperation with the scientific community, which started in 1993. ESA led the\n\t\t\t\t project, developed the satellite, integrated the payload into it, and launched\n\t\t\t\t and operated the satellite. Two Consortia, comprising around 100 scientific institutes within Europe, the USA, and Canada, and funded by agencies from\n\t\t\t\t the participating countries, developed and operated the scientific instruments\n\t\t\t\t LFI and HFI. The Consortia are also responsible for scientific processing of\n\t\t\t\t the acquired data. The Consortia are led by the Principal Investigators: J.-L.\n\t\t\t\t Puget in France for HFI (funded principally by CNES and CNRS/INSU-IN2P3)\n\t\t\t\t and N. Mandolesi in Italy for LFI (funded principally via ASI). NASA’s US\n\t\t\t\t Planck Project, based at JPL and involving scientists at many US institutions,\n\t\t\t\t contributes significantly to the efforts of these two Consortia. A third Consortium, led by H.U. Norgaard-Nielsen and supported by the Danish Natural Research Council, contributed to the reflector programme. These three Consortia, together with ESA’s Planck Science Office, form the Planck Collaboration. A\n\t\t\t\t description of the Planck Collaboration and a list of its members, indicating\n\t\t\t\t which technical or scientific activities they have been involved in, can be found\n\t\t\t\t at http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/planck/planck-collaboration. The Planck Collaboration acknowledges the support of: ESA; CNES and CNRS/INSU-IN2P3-\n\t\t\t\t INP (France); ASI, CNR, and INAF (Italy); NASA and DoE (USA); STFC and\n\t\t\t\t UKSA (UK); CSIC, MINECO, JA, and RES (Spain); Tekes, AoF, and CSC\n\t\t\t\t (Finland); DLR and MPG (Germany); CSA (Canada); DTU Space (Denmark);\n\t\t\t\t SER/SSO (Switzerland); RCN (Norway); SFI (Ireland); FCT/MCTES (Portugal); ERC and PRACE (EU). We thank Diego Falceta-Gonçalves for providing the technique for making the line-integral-convolution maps presented in\n\t\t\t\t Figs. 23 and 25.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".