MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972584000 · doi:10.1017/s1743921306005394

Rotation of Galaxy Dark Matter Halos

2006· article· en· W1972584000 on OpenAlexaff
S. Herbert-Fort, Dennis Zaritsky, Yeun Jin Kim, Jeremy Bailin, James E. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsHaloSatellite galaxyDark matter haloGalaxyAstronomyDark matterSpiral galaxyDark galaxyGalaxy rotation curveAngular momentumGalaxy formation and evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The degree to which outer dark matter halos of spiral galaxies rotate with the disk is sensitive to their accretion history and may be probed with associated satellite galaxies. We use the Steward Observatory Bok telescope to measure the sense of rotation of nearby isolated spirals and combine these data with those of their associated satellites (drawn from SDSS) to directly test predictions from numerical simulations. We aim to constrain models of galaxy formation by measuring the projected component of the halo angular momentum that is aligned with that of spiral galaxy disks, Jz. We find the mean bulk rotation of the ensemble satellite system to be co-rotating with the disk with a velocity of 22 ± 13 km/s, in general agreement with previous observational studies and suggesting that galaxy disks could be formed by halo baryons collapsing by a factor of ≈10. We also find a prograde satellite fraction of 51% and Jz, of the satellite system to be positively correlated with the disk, albeit at low significance (2655 ± 2232 kpc km/s).

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical UnionSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207