Tramp Novae between Galaxies in the Fornax Cluster: Tracers of Intracluster Light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the results of a survey for novae in and between the galaxies of the Fornax Cluster. Our survey provides strong evidence that intracluster novae exist and that they provide a useful, independent measure of the intracluster light in Fornax. We discovered six strong nova candidates in six distinct epochs spanning 11 yr from 1993 to 2004. The data were taken with the 4 m and the 1.5 m telescopes at Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory. The spatial distribution of the nova candidates is consistent with ~16%-41% of the total light in the cluster being in the intracluster light, based on the ratio of the number of novae we discovered in intracluster space over the total number of novae discovered plus a simple completeness correction factor. This estimate is consistent with independent measures of intracluster light in Fornax and Virgo using intracluster planetary nebulae. The accuracy of the intracluster light measurement improves with each survey epoch as more novae are discovered.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".