MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100325926

The CFHTLS Real Time Analysis System ”Optically Selected GRB Afterglows ” ⋆ I. Overview and performance

2008· article· en· W7100325926 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGamma-ray burstAfterglowPipeline (software)TelescopeVariable (mathematics)Collimated light
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims. We describe a wide and deep search for optical GRB afterglows on images taken with MegaCAM, the world largest astronomical CCD camera, at the Canada France Hawaii Telescope, within the framework of the CFHT Legacy Survey. Methods. This search is performed in near real-time thanks to a Real Time Analysis System (RTAS) called ”Optically Selected GRB Afterglows”, which has been completely realized and installed on a dedicated computer in Hawaii. This pipeline automatically and quickly analyzes Megacam images and extracts from them a list of astrometrically and photometrically variable objects which are displayed on a web page for validation by a member of the collaboration. Results. In this paper, we comprehensively describe the RTAS process. We also present statistical results based on nearly one full year of operation, showing the quality of the images and the performance of the RTAS. Finally, we compare the efficiency of this study with similar searches, propose an ideal observational strategy using simulations, and discuss general considerations on the searches for GRB afterglows independently of the prompt emission. Conclusions. This is the first of a series of two papers. A second paper will discuss the characterization of variable objects we have found, as well as the GRB afterglow candidates and their nature. We will also estimate or at least constrain the collimation factor of GRB using the

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae→French-language works237,207→