MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1810395999 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1937

NIHAO project – I. Reproducing the inefficiency of galaxy formation across cosmic time with a large sample of cosmological hydrodynamical simulations

2015· article· en· W1810395999 on OpenAlexaff
Liang Wang, Aaron A. Dutton, Gregory S. Stinson, Andrea V. Macciò, Camilla Penzo, Xi Kang, Ben Keller, James Wadsley

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyMilky WayGalaxy formation and evolutionStar formationStellar massSmoothed-particle hydrodynamicsAstronomyDwarf galaxyVirial theoremCOSMIC cancer database

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce project Nihao (Numerical Investigation of a Hundred Astrophysical Objects), a set of 100 cosmological zoom-in hydrodynamical simulations performed using the gasoline code, with an improved implementation of the SPH algorithm. The haloes in our study range from dwarf (M200 ∼ 5 × 109 M⊙) to Milky Way (M200 ∼ 2 × 1012 M⊙) masses, and represent an unbiased sampling of merger histories, concentrations and spin parameters. The particle masses and force softenings are chosen to resolve the mass profile to below 1 per cent of the virial radius at all masses, ensuring that galaxy half-light radii are well resolved. Using the same treatment of star formation and stellar feedback for every object, the simulated galaxies reproduce the observed inefficiency of galaxy formation across cosmic time as expressed through the stellar mass versus halo mass relation, and the star formation rate versus stellar mass relation. We thus conclude that stellar feedback is the chief piece of physics required to limit the efficiency of star formation in galaxies less massive than the Milky Way.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations401
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207