All works → Paper
Paper
An Observed-Label Chirality-Dipole Null in 890,069 Quality-Controlled High-Confidence DESI Spirals and an 8.5-Million-Galaxy Catalog
Do spiral galaxies' apparent handedness directions cluster? An 8.5M-galaxy test (result: no dipole)
Abstract
The galaxy chirality catalog: 8.47M galaxies classified CW/CCW by a ViT-Small ensemble with flip-equivariant TTA. Two real-compute pod-campaign closures land in v1.0.268. (1) G1 manifest-retained ViT retrain COMPLETE on RunPod A4000 (<$1 total): trained on 8,637 objects (6,637 GZ1-core + 2,000 synthetic; ce_resnet_present=false — the Jia CE-ResNet catalog still needs external re-provisioning, so the 826-vs-846 sub-conflict stays open and released Catalog C labels are UNCHANGED), every object ID/split/seed retained in the committed manifest, best_val_acc=0.9931 at epoch 47, checkpoint backed up to 3 verified locations. (2) G2 training-disjoint validation: accuracy=0.9867 / Cohen's kappa=0.9733 on 3,000 GZ1 confident spirals disjoint on both the object-ID and label-source axes (overlap counts 0), presented with an explicit like-for-like distinction vs the historical kappa=0.40 human-vote figure — a genuinely different measure, not a replacement for it. Caveat sites narrowed honestly at abstract/intro/discussion/conclusions/data-availability. No science number changed; the primary remains null-consistent and harmonic results remain systematics diagnostics only. CE-ResNet re-provisioning, the MASTER-decoupled/full-likelihood covariance legs, complete metadata, a DOI-backed archive, exact v1.0.268 confirmation, and human review remain open.
Result summary
- open8.47M galaxies classified (1,592,107 CW / 1,609,053 CCW / 5,273,371 NOT_SPIRAL)
- openStrict release-safe primary: N_selected=890,069, N_support=887,472, z_mom=+0.63465, one-sided empirical-rank p=0.23768
- derivedG1 manifest-retained ViT retrain: 8,637 objects (6,637 GZ1-core + 2,000 synthetic; CE-ResNet component absent pending external re-provisioning), every object ID/split/seed retained, best_val_acc=0.9931 @ epoch 47, checkpoint backed up to 3 verified locations — proves the exact training realization is regenerable
- measuredG2 training-disjoint validation: accuracy=0.9867 / Cohen's kappa=0.9733 on 3,000 GZ1 confident spirals disjoint from G1 training on both the object-ID and label-source axes (overlap counts 0); presented like-for-like against, and explicitly NOT as a replacement for, the historical kappa=0.40 GZ1 human-vote inter-rater figure — a different measure (model-vs-independent-labels agreement, not human-vote agreement)
Figures
Candidate figures — validated analysis outputs not yet included in the draft.
Readiness
0B / 0M / 0m / 0C open
Readiness is publication readiness only — science, evidence, review convergence, packaging, and Houston’s final sign-off. Venue and submission are tracked separately below, and never subtract from this number (directive P).
Publishing
Not part of readiness.
Review evidence (214 rounds)
Automated review is a gate on publication readiness, not a product. Full review timeline →
External peer review kit
Houston-driven manual round · paste prompt into any frontier LLM web UI with the PDF attachedOne click to copy a referee prompt scoped to this paper. One click to download the latest PDF. Paste both into Claude / GPT-5 / Gemini / Grok / Perplexity — return findings here and the autonomous cron will close them in the next bundled hard-fix wave.
preview prompt
You are an external referee for MNRAS / Physical Review D / JCAP (target journal depends on paper). Attached: Paper 4 v1.0.274 — "An Observed-Label Chirality-Dipole Null in 890,069 Quality-Controlled High-Confidence DESI Spirals and an 8.5-Million-Galaxy Catalog" Source: pipelines/p2_chirality/chirality_catalog_paper.tex PDF: PDF · 32 pp · v1.0.274 · updated Aug 3, 2026 · md5 6c7de2b81dfa3d7af2a7414214d57cfc · sha256 2641a228af1e3decf17d18341570c4e779483a823267421fe041aade1375e0d7 — Expected Calibration Error (ECE) expanded at first use; no scientific claim, number, or caveat changed. Read the FULL PDF end-to-end. Produce a referee report in MNRAS format with: 1. Recommendation: ACCEPT / MINOR REVISIONS / MAJOR REVISIONS / REJECT 2. BLOCKERS (must fix before publication) — list each with section/line + proposed fix 3. MAJORS (should fix) — same format 4. MINORS (polish) — same format 5. Strengths (>= 3 bullet points) 6. Specific scrutiny on: - Null-consistent strict safe-sample observed-label dipole - 8.47M-galaxy released classification catalog - Manifest-retained training and disjoint validation evidence - Bounded final-hash confirmation, systematics metadata, and Houston ApJS sign-off CALIBRATION (do not burn findings on these known classes): - The current date is June 2026. arXiv identifiers of the form 25xx.xxxxx and 26xx.xxxxx are VALID, already-published preprints — do not flag them as "future-dated" or "nonexistent". Verify a citation against arXiv/ADS before claiming it does not exist. - Correction notes, retraction notices, and "an earlier version stated X" disclosures in the text are DELIBERATE transparency policy. Flag them only if their content is wrong, never for existing. - Companion-paper citations marked "posted concurrently on arXiv" are deliberate placeholders; real arXiv IDs are inserted during the coordinated submission sequence. - Explicitly labeled conservatism allowances, scaling estimates, ansatz/heuristic status labels, and disclosed queued follow-up computations are deliberate scoping, not oversights — flag only if the label itself is inaccurate. - PDF text extraction can mangle math (square roots, fractions, superscripts). Before flagging "garbled" or "wrong" math, consider extraction artifacts; flag only what is visibly wrong in the rendered PDF. VERDICT STANDARD (apply the SAME high bar a first-pass Physical Review D / MNRAS referee would — this is one of the most rigorous journals in the world): - Assign each finding's severity (BLOCKER / MAJOR / MINOR) by your own independent referee judgment. Do NOT default to any tier, and do NOT soften a finding because the rest of the paper is strong. Do not echo this prompt's context. - A reporting choice that headlines the more favorable of two numbers, an unstated assumption, an uncontrolled systematic, or an internal inconsistency IS a real finding — classify it honestly (MINOR at minimum), not as mere "style" or "opinion". - Truth-audit any claim that seems off by checking it against the published .tex / on-disk artifacts before flagging (this only filters out genuine extraction artifacts — it does not lower the bar on real defects).
Reproduce this
Lineage
Archived — Folded into P4′, the Track C1 chirality test (v4P.0.1), with P5 folded in as one section — 2026-09-02 portfolio restructure, directive R3. Every P4′ number is quoted verbatim from this reviewed v1.0.274 source; the catalog pipeline was not re-run. See the current version at paper-paper-4p