The apostle project: Local Group kinematic mass constraints and simulation candidate selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use a large sample of isolated dark matter halo pairs drawn from cosmological N-body simulations to identify candidate systems whose kinematics match that of the Local Group (LG) of galaxies. We find, in agreement with the ‘timing argument’ and earlier work, that the separation and approach velocity of the Milky Way (MW) and Andromeda (M31) galaxies favour a total mass for the pair of ∼5 × 1012 M⊙. A mass this large, however, is difficult to reconcile with the small relative tangential velocity of the pair, as well as with the small deceleration from the Hubble flow observed for the most distant LG members. Halo pairs that match these three criteria have average masses a factor of ∼2 times smaller than suggested by the timing argument, but with large dispersion. Guided by these results, we have selected 12 halo pairs with total mass in the range 1.6–3.6 × 1012 M⊙ for the apostle project (A Project Of Simulating The Local Environment), a suite of hydrodynamical resimulations at various numerical resolution levels (reaching up to ∼104 M⊙ per gas particle) that use the subgrid physics developed for the eagle project. These simulations reproduce, by construction, the main kinematics of the MW–M31 pair, and produce satellite populations whose overall number, luminosities, and kinematics are in good agreement with observations of the MW and M31 companions. The apostle candidate systems thus provide an excellent testbed to confront directly many of the predictions of the Λ cold dark matter cosmology with observations of our local Universe.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".