MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1967461765 · doi:10.1086/589830

Molecular Gas in the <i>z</i> = 1.2 Ultraluminous Merger GOODS J123634.53+621241.3

2008· article· en· W1967461765 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyLuminous infrared galaxyStar formationSpiral galaxyRedshiftLuminosityGalaxy mergerLine (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the detection of CO(2→1) emission from the z = 1.2 ultraluminous infrared galaxy (ULIRG) GOODS J123634.53+621241.3 (also known as the submillimeter galaxy GN 26). These observations represent the first discovery of high-redshift CO emission using the new Combined Array for Research in Millimeter-Wave Astronomy (CARMA). Of all high-redshift ( z > 1) galaxies within the GOODS-North field, this source has the largest far-infrared (FIR) flux observed in the Spitzer 70 and 160 μm bands. The CO redshift confirms the optical identification of the source, and the bright CO(2→1) line suggests the presence of a large molecular gas reservoir of about 7 × 10 10 M ☉ . The infrared-to-CO luminosity ratio of L (IR)/ L ' (CO) = 80 ± 30 L ☉ (K km s −1 pc 2 ) −1 is slightly smaller than the average ratio found in local ULIRGs and high-redshift submillimeter galaxies. The short star formation timescale of about 70 Myr is consistent with a starburst associated with the merger event and is much shorter than the timescales for spiral galaxies and estimates made for high-redshift galaxies selected on the basis of their B − z and z − K colors.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations41
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→