MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970440163 · doi:10.1086/427937

Cosmic Star Formation History and Its Dependence on Galaxy Stellar Mass

2005· article· en· W1970440163 on OpenAlexaff
S. Juneau, Karl Glazebrook, D. Crampton, Patrick J. McCarthy, S. Savaglio, Roberto Abraham, R. G. Carlberg, Hsiao‐Wen Chen, D. Le Borgne, Ronald O. Marzke, Kathy Roth, Inger Jørgensen, I. Hook, Richard Murowinski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCOSMIC cancer databaseAstrophysicsStar (game theory)Star formationAstronomyGalaxyPhysicsStellar mass

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the cosmic star formation rate (SFR) and its dependence on galaxy stellar mass over the redshift range 0.8 < z < 2 using data from the Gemini Deep Deep Survey (GDDS). The SFR in the most massive galaxies ( M * > 10 10.8 M ☉ ) was 6 times higher at z = 2 than it is today. It drops steeply from z = 2, reaching the present-day value at z ~ 1. In contrast, the SFR density of intermediate-mass galaxies (10 10.2 M ☉ ≤ M * < 10 10.8 M ☉ ) declines more slowly and may peak or plateau at z ~ 1.5. We use the characteristic growth time t SFR ≡ ρ /ρ SFR to provide evidence of an associated transition in massive galaxies from a burst to a quiescent star formation mode at z ~ 2. Intermediate-mass systems transit from burst to quiescent mode at z ~ 1, while the lowest mass objects undergo bursts throughout our redshift range. Our results show unambiguously that the formation era for galaxies was extended and proceeded from high- to low-mass systems. The most massive galaxies formed most of their stars in the first ~3 Gyr of cosmic history. Intermediate-mass objects continued to form their dominant stellar mass for an additional ~2 Gyr, while the lowest mass systems have been forming over the whole cosmic epoch spanned by the GDDS. This view of galaxy formation clearly supports "downsizing" in the SFR where the most massive galaxies form first and galaxy formation proceeds from larger to smaller mass scales.

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)0.004
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
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations357
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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