DARK MATTER HALOS IN GALAXIES AND GLOBULAR CLUSTER POPULATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We combine a new, comprehensive database for globular cluster populations in all types of galaxies with a new calibration of galaxy halo masses based entirely on weak lensing. Correlating these two sets of data, we find that the mass ratio η ≡ M GCS / M h (total mass in globular clusters, divided by halo mass) is essentially constant at 〈η〉 ∼ 4 × 10 −5 , strongly confirming earlier suggestions in the literature. Globular clusters are the only known stellar population that formed in essentially direct proportion to host galaxy halo mass. The intrinsic scatter in η appears to be at most 0.2 dex; we argue that some of this scatter is due to differing degrees of tidal stripping of the globular cluster systems between central and satellite galaxies. We suggest that this correlation can be understood if most globular clusters form at very early stages in galaxy evolution, largely avoiding the feedback processes that inhibited the bulk of field-star formation in their host galaxies. The actual mean value of η also suggests that about one-fourth of the initial gas mass present in protogalaxies collected into giant molecular clouds large enough to form massive, dense star clusters. Finally, our calibration of 〈η〉 indicates that the halo masses of the Milky Way and M31 are (1.2 ± 0.5) × 10 12 M ☉ and (3.9 ± 1.8) × 10 12 M ☉ , respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".