adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Example of groups detected over a brick. This brick lies at the edge of a mosaic and so has boundaries with two adjacent bricks. Source centroids are shown by green crosses. Groups are outlined by red boxes, and group footprints of owned pixels by the green borders.
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Probability of models as a function of apparent magnitude. Results from i are shown in gray histograms, summarized by binned medians of unresolved (solid) and resolved models (dashed). Other band are similarly summarized by binned medians.
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: A point source is simulated in the vicinity of a large, central elliptical galaxy. Models are fitted for three cases: the sources are blended and have only one centroid (mixed); the sources are blended, modeled, and then the missing source is recovered from the residual image and modeled (mixed–recovered); and lastly, both sources are a priori known and simultaneously fit (separated). Each measurement is repeated over a grid of relative brightness (0 meaning that the point source is negligible) and the distance from the central elliptical to the point source (20 means the point source is in the top left corner). While gray areas indicate successful recovery of the input (true) flux of the elliptical source, red areas indicate that the flux of the elliptical is underestimated. White areas in the middle panel indicate where the point source is not detected in the mixed residual. The model and residual of three situations are shown for each measurement strategy.
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: The accuracy of the models in various magnitude regimes can be assessed by measuring fluxes that are in circular apertures of increasing diameter on simulated input i-band image (black), The Farmer joint model with neighbors (blue), their residual (red), and The Farmer model without neighbors (green). For easy comparison, the y-axis shows each aperture flux measurement normalized to the true input flux and summarized by a median and 68% range, which are shown as colored regions except for the input image, which is shown as black dashed lines. While faint sources contain higher fractions of blends at a given radius (the black rises above unity in the lower panels), The Farmer is still able to recover the input source flux (green tends to unity at large radii).
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Photometry produced by The Farmer is compared with true fluxes of simulated sources for all bands. Differences in magnitude as a function of input magnitude (gray histograms) are summarized by binned medians (colored curves) with 68% ranges indicated by the colored envelope out to the nominal depth limit of each band (vertical colored lines). Expected ±1σ and 3σ uncertainties on Δmag are computed as medians from the The Farmer uncertainties (gray dotted curves).
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Number counts are shown for each band corresponding to the simulation input for all sources (filled gray points), resolved sources (gray dotted curve), and unresolved sources (gray dashed–dotted curve). This is compared to output from The Farmer (unfilled colored points with Poisson uncertainties) for an iz-selected sample. Nominal depths are shown by the vertical colored lines.
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Recovery of effective radius (R eff;  top row), axis ratio (b/a; middle row), and position angle (θ; bottom row) as a function of input parameter, z-band magnitude, Sérsic index (n), and the local source density (number of sources within 5″). Gray-scale distributions are summarized by binned medians (colored curves) with 68% range indicated by the envelope.
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Fraction of sources below a certain χ 2 as a function of band and magnitude for unresolved (left) and resolved models (right).
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Fraction of sources whose relative photometric error ϵ is less than a certain value, broken down by resolved (left panels) and unresolved models (right panels) for each band. On expectation, ∣ϵ < 1∣ for 68% of sources where a significant departure may indicate underestimation or overestimation of photometric uncertainties.
Paper:  The Farmer: A Reproducible Profile-fitting Photometry Package for Deep Galaxy Surveys
Authors: J. R. Weaver, L. Zalesky, V. Kokorev, C. J. R. McPartland, N. Chartab, K. M. L. Gould, M. Shuntov, I. Davidzon, A. Faisst, N. Stickley, P. L. Capak, S. Toft, D. Masters, B. Mobasher, D. B. Sanders, O. B. Kauffmann, H. J. McCracken, O. Ilbert, G. Brammer, A. Moneti
Figure caption: Summary of deblending power of The Farmer. Similar layout to Figure 15, but for sources photometered in i band (left) and channel (1) (right) broken down by local density n5 defined by the number of sources within 5″.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: A schematic diagram of two ways that the orbital plane deviates from the ecliptic plane. The gray plane is the ecliptic plane, whereas the yellow plane depicts the orbital plane. (a) The orbital plane can be obtained by rotating the inclination angle α around the ﹩X^{\prime} ﹩-axis, which denotes the major axis of the orbit. (b) The corresponding rotation axis is the ﹩Y^{\prime} ﹩-axis, which represents the minor axis of the orbit.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: A sketch of the disrupted magnetic field that forms during the solar eruptive process. The colors roughly indicate the plasma layers in different temperatures (from Lin et al. 2004). The diagram combines the two-ribbon flare configuration proposed by Forbes & Acton (1996) as well as the CME configuration of Lin & Forbes (2000).
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: The figure depicts a conceptual representation of a CS that may be traversed by a spacecraft. The orbital plane intersects the CS at the line OC 0, while the orbit itself crosses the CS at the point C orb. C 1 and C 2 mark two endpoints of the CS. Q is the location of the spacecraft at the eruption time t. The three cyan arrows represent the three characteristic periods: τ 0, τ orb, and τ fly, which indicate the lifetime of the CS, the time of the CS propagation to the orbit, and the time of the spacecraft flight from Q to C orb, respectively.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: The figure depicts the simplified morphology of a CS. (a) The GCS model by Thernisien et al. (2009), where the red box highlights the location of the CS. (b) The basic features of a CS, including its length (l), half-angular width (δ), and tilt angle (γ). (c) The position, longitude (ϕ  s ), and latitude (θ  s ) of the eruption source labeled as “S.” (d) A magnified view of the region enclosed by the dotted box in (c), where “F” denotes the filament along the northeast–southwest direction (γ < 0) and the dashed line represents the PIL.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: The conditions required for an infinitely long CS to intersect with different orbits. From the top to bottom panels, the three rows correspond to the orbits: (1) α = 0°; (2) α ≠ 0 and ﹩\mathrm{rot}=X^{\prime} ﹩; and (3) α ≠ 0 and ﹩\mathrm{rot}=Y^{\prime} ﹩. The left panels depict the subdomain Ω1 in the three-dimensional parameter space with θ  s , ϕ  s , and γ as coordinates. The red arrow in panel (a1) represents the set of CSs that erupt at the source (θ  s , ϕ  s ), with γ being allowed to take on any value. The blue lines in panels (a1)–(c1) represent the sets of tangent points of the red arrow to Ω1. In the middle panels, we show the locations that could generate CDCSs, in the domain bounded by the two blue dashed lines. The red and black dashed lines indicate the equator and the projection of the orbit, respectively. The right panels display the Δγ of CDCSs that erupt from different sources. The lines of different colors in the right panels have the same meaning as in the middle panels.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: (a) The conditional probability for a CS to be traversed by the spacecraft, given that the CS is generated by a CME with speed v  c . Here, the green, orange, and blue scatter plots are the results of different orbits: PSP, Orb3, and Orb6, respectively. (b) The probability distributions of the speeds of CMEs (CDAW data from Lamy et al. 2019). (c) The probability for a CS that is produced by a CME with various velocities to be traversed, which is the product of the corresponding terms in panels (a) and (b). Unlike panel (a), panel (c) includes the impact of CME velocities on estimating the probability. At the bottom of panel (c), we present the probability for the spacecraft in different orbits to traverse a CS, P tra (see Equation (42)), and the expected numbers for the spacecraft to traverse the CS in one year in the solar maximum (see Equation (44)).
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: The top two panels show the probability of different orbits intersecting an infinitely long CS erupted from a unit area on the solar surface, where ﹩\mathrm{rot}=X^{\prime} ﹩ in the first row and ﹩\mathrm{rot}=Y^{\prime} ﹩ in the second one. In the bottom panel, we display the intersection probability vs. the inclination angle α of the orbit. The results indicate that the intersection probability is independent to rot and the orbit with α = 29° is the most likely to intersect an infinitely long CS.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: The left three panels show the probability of various orbits intersecting a finitely long CS erupted from a unit area on the solar surface, with CS lengths of l = 12R ⊙, 27R ⊙, and 90R ⊙, respectively. The rightmost panel displays the intersection probability at different locations in the orbit. The panels from (a) to (f) correspond to the orbits from Orb1 to Orb6 listed in Table 2.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: (a) A sketch of the angle between the CS plane (red triangle) and the instantaneous velocity (cyan vector) of the spacecraft at the traverse moment, which is denoted as σ. Panels (b)–(e) display the intersection probabilities vs. the inclination angle of orbit and correspond to four situations: that σ could be any value, small σ, medium σ, and large σ. The blue and orange lines, respectively, correspond to the smaller orbits with ﹩\mathrm{rot}=Y^{\prime} ﹩ and ﹩X^{\prime} ﹩, and the green dashed line matches the larger orbit with ﹩\mathrm{rot}=X^{\prime} ﹩, where the larger and smaller orbits mean a = 82.9R ⊙, b = 73.1R ⊙ and a = 65R ⊙, b = 60R ⊙. The numbers in panels (b)–(e) correspond to different orbits in Table 2.
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: Relationship between the tilt angle γ and the latitude θ  s . (a) The joint PDF of f(θ  s , γ) in the (θ  s , γ) space. The color represents the number of filaments of different tilt angle, γ, at different latitudes, θ  s  (data from Hao et al. 2015). (b) Variations of the average γ evaluated from panel (a) vs. θ  s . The marginal PDFs of θ  s  and γ are illustrated in panels (c) and (d).
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: A sketch of the rotating operations that correspond to the rotating matrices ﹩{ \mathcal M }({\boldsymbol{O}}{\boldsymbol{A}},{\theta }_{s})﹩ and ﹩{ \mathcal M }({\boldsymbol{O}}{{\boldsymbol{S}}}_{{\boldsymbol{b}}},\gamma )﹩, illustrating how to obtain the endpoints of a CS in the ﹩X^{\prime} Y^{\prime} Z^{\prime} ﹩ coordinate system by rotating the reference CS, CS a .
Paper: Can the Parker Solar Probe Detect a CME-flare Current Sheet?
Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhong Liu, Pengfei Chen, David F. Webb, Qi Hao, Jialiang Hu, Guanchong Cheng, Zhixing Mei, Jing Ye, Qian Wang, Jun Lin
Figure caption: True and eccentric anomalies ν and E. From Beutler (2005).
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: Left: Gaia DR3 absolute magnitude (M  G ) vs. color (G RP − G BP) diagram (CMD) and the corresponding density distributions for sample, sample II, and LAMOST SB1s. The dashed line denotes a dwarf–giant distinction given by Merle et al. (2020). Right: Kiel diagram and density distributions of effective temperature (T eff) and surface gravity (﹩\mathrm{log}\,g﹩) obtained by LAMOST LASP for different samples of stars as indicated in the legend.
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: Period–eccentricity relationship of the fitted orbit for our SB1s. Markers are colored by surface gravity, ﹩\mathrm{log}\,g﹩. The dotted line represents the upper envelope, which was derived by Mazeh (2008).
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: The RV curves and residuals for 11 common sources with Gaia DR3, Leiner et al. (2015), and Meibom & Mathieu (2005). The orange and light purple solid lines depict spectroscopic orbits provided by LAMOST and other works, respectively. The light orange and light purple shading indicates the corresponding 1σ uncertainties. Note that the dots in each graph represent LAMOST observation data, with the same color denoting observations conducted in the same year. In the left panel of the last row, the data from Leiner et al. (2015) are also illustrated using star-shaped symbols.
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: Left: cumulative distribution of Gaia DR3 distances toward sources for different samples of stars. Middle and right: cumulative distribution function of metallicity derived by LAMOST LASP ([Fe/H]) and Gaia GSP-Phot ([M/H]).
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: The RV curves (the solid orange lines) and residuals (bottom row) for three examples of new SB1s. The dots in each graph represent LAMOST observation data, and their identical colors indicate observations taken in the same year.
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: Comparison of the orbital periods of 11 common systems between our work and the previous studies.
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: The absolute difference in ω between LAMOST and other works plotted against e.
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption:  F2 distribution of sample (empty histogram), sample I (filled orange).
Paper: New SB1s with Spectroscopic Orbits from LAMOST-LRS
Authors: Yue Chen, 悦 陈, Fang Xia, 芳 夏, Xiaoli Wang, 晓丽 王, Yanning Fu, 燕宁 傅, Ye Yuan, 烨 袁
Figure caption: Histograms of P and K.
Paper: A Strong-flare Prediction Model Developed Using a Machine-learning Algorithm Based on the Video Data Sets of the Solar Magnetic Field of Active Regions
Authors: Jingjing Wang, Bingxian Luo, Siqing Liu, Yue Zhang
Figure caption: Verification metrics of the prediction models. From top to bottom, they are recall, precision, F1 score, accuracy, TSS, and HSS. The error of recall, precision, and accuracy is calculated by a 95% confidence interval. The error of F1 score, TSS, and HSS is the standard deviation of the scores calculated by multi-small-test samples that have a similar distribution to the entire test sample.
Paper: A Strong-flare Prediction Model Developed Using a Machine-learning Algorithm Based on the Video Data Sets of the Solar Magnetic Field of Active Regions
Authors: Jingjing Wang, Bingxian Luo, Siqing Liu, Yue Zhang
Figure caption: An example of the X2.2 flare video sample which erupted from SHARP patch No. 377 (AR 11158). From left to right and from top to bottom, there are 96 pictures with a size of 112 pixels × 112 pixels that correspond to 0–95 hr before the start time of the flare.
Paper: A Strong-flare Prediction Model Developed Using a Machine-learning Algorithm Based on the Video Data Sets of the Solar Magnetic Field of Active Regions
Authors: Jingjing Wang, Bingxian Luo, Siqing Liu, Yue Zhang
Figure caption: An example of the X2.2 flare video sample which erupted from SHARP patch No. 7115 (AR 2673). From left to right and from top to bottom, there are 93 pictures with a size of 112 pixels × 112 pixels that correspond to 0–92 hr before the start time of the flare.
Paper: A Strong-flare Prediction Model Developed Using a Machine-learning Algorithm Based on the Video Data Sets of the Solar Magnetic Field of Active Regions
Authors: Jingjing Wang, Bingxian Luo, Siqing Liu, Yue Zhang
Figure caption: The illustration of the networks of the video model (on the left) and image model (on the right).
Paper: A Strong-flare Prediction Model Developed Using a Machine-learning Algorithm Based on the Video Data Sets of the Solar Magnetic Field of Active Regions
Authors: Jingjing Wang, Bingxian Luo, Siqing Liu, Yue Zhang
Figure caption: Results of the prediction models. As illustrated in Table 1, TP, TN, FN, and FP represents True Positive, True Negative, False Negative, and False Positive, respectively.
Paper: A Strong-flare Prediction Model Developed Using a Machine-learning Algorithm Based on the Video Data Sets of the Solar Magnetic Field of Active Regions
Authors: Jingjing Wang, Bingxian Luo, Siqing Liu, Yue Zhang
Figure caption: Forecasts of flaring ARs (hit cases) for the positive samples (M and above class flaring ARs).
Paper: ALMA-IMF. VIII. Combination of Interferometric Continuum Images with Single-dish Surveys and Structural Analysis of Six Protoclusters
Authors: Daniel J. Díaz-González, Roberto Galván-Madrid, Adam Ginsburg, Frédérique Motte, Pierre Dell'Ova, Stanley Kurtz, Nichol Cunningham, Amelia M. Stutz, Fabien Louvet, Timea Csengeri, Manuel Fernández-López, Patricio Sanhueza, Thomas Nony, Rudy Rivera-Soto, Rodrigo H. Álvarez-Gutiérrez, Melanie Armante, Melisse Bonfand, Sylvain Bontemps, Antoine Gusdorf, Hong-Li Liu
Figure caption: Colored pixels show the dominant emission type based on the Band 3 to Band 6 spectral index. α ≥ 1.5 is labeled as dust emission (salmon), and α ≤ 0.5 corresponds to free–free emission (light blue). Intermediate spectral indices are labeled as mixed (gray). Overlaid contours show the spatial distribution of leaves (black), trunks (magenta), and isolated structures (orange), measured in the Band 6 images.