The Relative Star Formation Histories of Spiral Bulges and Elliptical Galaxies in the Hubble Deep Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hierarchical galaxy formation models make specific predictions concerning the relative assembly rates and star formation histories of spiral bulges and field ellipticals. Independently of the cosmological model and initial power spectrum of fluctuations, at all epochs the stellar populations in spiral bulges should be older and redder than those in typical ellipticals selected at the same redshift. To test this simple prediction, we analyze the internal optical colors of a complete sample of I<24 mag early-type and spiral galaxies from the Northern and Southern Hubble Deep Fields (HDF). The subset of galaxies in the Northern HDF are also investigated in the near-infrared using NICMOS photometry. We compare the central (inner 5% radius) colors of those spirals with clearly visible bulges with the integrated colors of ellipticals in our sample. Comparisons are possible to a redshift z~1 at which point well-defined bulges become difficult to locate. While spiral bulges are systematically redder in their optical colors than their associated disks at all redshifts, we find that the majority are significantly bluer than the red locus occupied by most field ellipticals at similar redshifts. In the near-infrared, similar trends are found at redshifts z<0.6, but at higher redshifts some bulges as red as the reddest ellipticals are found. We conclude that a significant rejuvenation may have occurred in the inner stellar populations of many spiral galaxies at intermediate redshifts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".