Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 87 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 51 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 17 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 102 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 166 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 436 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Galaxy And Mass Assembly: A Comparison between Galaxy-Galaxy Lens Searches in KiDS/GAMA (2009.09493v1)

Published 20 Sep 2020 in astro-ph.GA

Abstract: Strong gravitational lenses are a rare and instructive type of astronomical object. Identification has long relied on serendipity, but different strategies -- such as mixed spectroscopy of multiple galaxies along the line of sight, machine learning algorithms, and citizen science -- have been employed to identify these objects as new imaging surveys become available. We report on the comparison between spectroscopic, machine learning, and citizen science identification of galaxy-galaxy lens candidates from independently constructed lens catalogs in the common survey area of the equatorial fields of the GAMA survey. In these, we have the opportunity to compare high-completeness spectroscopic identifications against high-fidelity imaging from the Kilo Degree Survey (KiDS) used for both machine learning and citizen science lens searches. We find that the three methods -- spectroscopy, machine learning, and citizen science -- identify 47, 47, and 13 candidates respectively in the 180 square degrees surveyed. These identifications barely overlap, with only two identified by both citizen science and machine learning. We have traced this discrepancy to inherent differences in the selection functions of each of the three methods, either within their parent samples (i.e. citizen science focuses on low-redshift) or inherent to the method (i.e. machine learning is limited by its training sample and prefers well-separated features, while spectroscopy requires sufficient flux from lensed features to lie within the fiber). These differences manifest as separate samples in estimated Einstein radius, lens stellar mass, and lens redshift. The combined sample implies a lens candidate sky-density $\sim0.59$ deg${-2}$ and can inform the construction of a training set spanning a wider mass-redshift space.

Citations (6)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Don't miss out on important new AI/ML research

See which papers are being discussed right now on X, Reddit, and more:

“Emergent Mind helps me see which AI papers have caught fire online.”

Philip

Philip

Creator, AI Explained on YouTube