Physical Properties of a Pilot Sample of Spectroscopic Close Pair Galaxies at z ~ 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use Hubble Space Telescope Wide-Field Camera 3 (HST/WFC3) rest-frame optical imaging to select a pilot sample of star-forming galaxies in the redshift range z = 2.00-2.65 whose multi-component morphologies are consistent with expectations for major mergers. We follow up this sample of major merger candidates with Keck/NIRSPEC longslit spectroscopy obtained in excellent seeing conditions (FWHM ~ 0.5 arcsec) to obtain Halpha-based redshifts of each of the morphological components in order to distinguish spectroscopic pairs from false pairs created by projection along the line of sight. Of six pair candidates observed, companions (estimated mass ratios 5:1 and 7:1) are detected for two galaxies down to a 3sigma limiting emission-line flux of ~ 10^{-17} erg/s/cm2. This detection rate is consistent with a ~ 50% false pair fraction at such angular separations (1-2 arcsec), and with recent claims that the star-formation rate (SFR) can differ by an order of magnitude between the components in such mergers. The two spectroscopic pairs identified have total SFR, SFR surface densities, and stellar masses consistent on average with the overall z ~ 2 star forming galaxy population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".