MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930610742 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slv116

The spatially-resolved star formation history of the M31 outer disc

2015· article· en· W1930610742 on OpenAlexaff
Edouard J. Bernard, A. M. N. Ferguson, S. C. Chapman, Rodrigo Ibata, Geraint F. Lewis, Alan W. McConnachie

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsDalhousie University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsMilky WayStar formationMetallicityGalaxyAdvanced Camera for SurveysAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present deep Hubble Space Telescope Advanced Camera for Surveys observations of the stellar populations in two fields lying at 20 and 23 kpc from the centre of M31 along the south-west semimajor axis. These data enable the construction of colour–magnitude diagrams reaching the oldest main-sequence turn-offs (∼13 Gyr) which, when combined with another field at 25 kpc from our previous work, we use to derive the first precision constraints on the spatially-resolved star formation history of the M31 disc. The star formation rates exhibit temporal as well as field-to-field variations, but are generally always within a factor of 2 of their time average. There is no evidence of inside-out growth over the radial range probed. We find a median age of ∼7.5 Gyr, indicating that roughly half of the stellar mass in the M31 outer disc was formed before z ∼ 1. We also find that the age–metallicity relations (AMRs) are smoothly increasing from [Fe/H] ≃ −0.4 to solar metallicity between 10 and 3 Gyr ago, contrary to the flat AMR of the Milky Way disc at a similar number of scalelengths. Our findings provide insight on the roles of stellar feedback and radial migration in the formation and evolution of large disc galaxies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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