MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1914733070 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1012

Nuclear star cluster formation in energy-space

2015· article· en· W1914733070 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathan W. C. Leigh, Iskren Y. Georgiev, Torsten Böker, C. Knigge, Mark den Brok

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyStar clusterSurface brightnessObservableStar formationCluster (spacecraft)AstronomyGalaxy clusterIntergalactic starAngular momentumGalaxy merger

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a virialized stellar system, the mean-square velocity is a direct tracer of the energy per unit mass of the system. Here, we exploit this to estimate and compare root-mean-square velocities for a large sample of nuclear star clusters and their host (late- or early-type) galaxies. Traditional observables, such as the radial surface brightness and second-order velocity moment profiles, are subject to short-term variations due to individual episodes of matter infall and/or star formation. The total mass, energy and angular momentum, on the other hand, are approximately conserved. Thus, the total energy and angular momentum more directly probe the formation of galaxies and their nuclear star clusters, by offering access to more fundamental properties of the nuclear cluster–galaxy system than traditional observables. We find that there is a strong correlation, in fact a near equality, between the root-mean-square velocity of a nuclear star cluster and that of its host. Thus, the energy per unit mass of a nuclear star cluster is always comparable to that of its host galaxy. We interpret this as evidence that nuclear star clusters do not form independently of their host galaxies, but rather that their formation and subsequent evolution are coupled. We discuss how our results can potentially be used to offer a clear and observationally testable prediction to distinguish between the different nuclear star cluster formation scenarios, and/or quantify their relative contributions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→