MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993344712 · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/740/1/l1

DETECTION OF INFALLING HYDROGEN IN TRANSFER BETWEEN THE INTERACTING GALAXIES NGC 5426 AND NGC 5427

2011· article· en· W1993344712 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyHubble sequenceStarsStar formationEmission spectrumLine-of-sightLine (geometry)Dwarf galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using velocity tagging we have detected hydrogen from NGC 5426 falling onto its interacting partner NGC 5427. Our observations, with the GHaFaS Fabry–Perot spectrometer, produced maps of the two galaxies in Hα surface brightness and radial velocity. We found emission with the range of velocities associated with NGC 5426 along lines of sight apparently emanating from NGC 5427, superposed on the velocity map of the latter. After excluding instrumental effects we assign the anomalous emission to gas pulled from NGC 5426 during its passage close to NGC 5427. Its distribution, more intense between the arms and just outside the disk of NGC 5427, and weak, or absent, in the arms, suggests that the infalling gas is behind the disk, ionized by Lyman continuum photons escaping from NGC 5427. Modeling this, we estimate the distances of these gas clouds behind the plane: a few hundred parsecs to a few kiloparsecs. We also estimate the mass of the infalling (ionized plus neutral) gas, finding an infall rate of 10 M ☉ per year, consistent with the high measured star formation rate across the disk of NGC 5427 and with the detected circumnuclear galactic wind.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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