MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973507323 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0170

Shell galaxies as laboratories for testing MOND

2014· article· en· W1973507323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMasarykova UniverzitaUniverzita Karlova v Praze
KeywordsShell (structure)GalaxyElliptical galaxyGravitationBulgeGravitational potentialStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tests of MOND in elliptical galaxies are relatively rare because they often lack kinematic tracers in the regions where MOND effects are significant. Stellar shells observed in many elliptical galaxies offer a promising way to constrain their gravitational fields. Shells appear as glowing arcs around the host galaxy, with radii observed up to ∼100 kpc. The stars in axially symmetric shell systems move in nearly radial orbits. The radial distributions of shell locations and the spectra of stars in shells can be used to constrain the gravitational potential of their host galaxy. The symmetrical shell systems, being especially suitable for these studies, occur in approximately 3% of all early-type galaxies. Hence, if we overcome several problems (e.g., multiple shell generations present in the system, shells missed by observations, blurry shell edges, dynamical friction during the merger), the shells substantially increase the number of ellipticals in which MOND can be tested up to large radii. In this paper, we review our work on shell galaxies in MOND. We summarize Bílek et al. (Astron. Astrophys. 559, A110 (2013)), where we demonstrated the consistency of shell radii in an elliptical NGC 3923 with MOND, and Bílek et al. (arXiv:1404.1109. 2014), in which we predicted a giant (∼200 kpc), yet undiscovered shell of NGC 3923. We explain the shell identification method that was used in these two papers. We further describe the expected shape of line profiles in shell spectra in MOND, which is very special because of the direct relation of the gravitational field and baryonic matter distribution (Bílek et al. 2014, in preparation).

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207