MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967955912 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/709/1/l53

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IN THE EVOLUTION OF GALACTIC BULGES

2010· article· en· W1967955912 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBulgeRedshiftGalactic planeSpiral galaxyGalaxyPhotometry (optics)Star formationCluster (spacecraft)Disc

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate possible environmental trends in the evolution of galactic bulges over the redshift range 0 < z < 0.6. For this purpose, we construct the fundamental plane (FP) for cluster and field samples at redshifts 〈 z 〉 = 0.4 and 〈 z 〉 = 0.54 using surface photometry based on Hubble Space Telescope imaging and velocity dispersions based on Keck spectroscopy. As a reference point for our study, we include data for pure ellipticals, which we model as single-component Sérsic profiles; whereas for multi-component galaxies we undertake decompositions using Sérsic and exponential models for the bulge and disk, respectively. Although the FP for both distant cluster and field samples is offset from the local relation, consistent with evolutionary trends found in earlier studies, we detect significant differences in the zero point of ≃0.2 dex between the field and cluster samples at a given redshift. For both clusters, the environmentally dependent offset is in the sense expected for an accelerated evolution of bulges in dense environments. By matching the mass range of our samples, we confirm that this difference does not arise as a result of the mass-dependent downsizing effects seen in larger field samples. Our result is also consistent with the hypothesis that—at fixed mass and environment—the star formation histories of galactic bulges and pure spheroids are indistinguishable and difficult to reconcile with the picture whereby the majority of large bulges form primarily via secular processes within spiral 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 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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207