A GEMINI/GMOS STUDY OF INTERMEDIATE LUMINOSITY EARLY-TYPE VIRGO CLUSTER GALAXIES. I. GLOBULAR CLUSTER AND STELLAR KINEMATICS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a kinematic analysis of the globular cluster (GC) systems and diffuse stellar light of four intermediate luminosity (sub- L *) early-type galaxies in the Virgo cluster based on Gemini Multi-Object Spectrographs (GMOS) data. Our galaxy sample is fainter ( ) than most previous studies, nearly doubling the number of galaxies in this magnitude range that now have GC kinematics. The data for the diffuse light extends to 4 R e , and the data for the GCs reaches 8–12 R e . We find that the kinematics in these outer regions are all different despite the fact that these four galaxies have similar photometric properties, and are uniformly classified as "fast rotators" from their stellar kinematics within 1 R e . The GC systems exhibit a wide range of kinematic morphology. The rotation axis and amplitude can change between the inner and outer regions, including a case of counter-rotation. This difference shows the importance of wide-field kinematic studies, and shows that stellar and GC kinematics can change significantly as one moves beyond the inner regions of galaxies. Moreover, the kinematics of the GC systems can differ from that of the stars, suggesting that the formation of the two populations are also distinct.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".