MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026170380 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/692/1/298

MORPHOLOGICAL COMPOSITION OF<i>z</i>∼ 0.4 GROUPS: THE SITE OF S0 FORMATION

2009· article· en· W2026170380 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsGalaxyLuminosityStar formationRedshiftGalaxy formation and evolutionLenticular galaxyElliptical galaxyGalaxy group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The low-redshift universe (z ≲ 0.5) is not a dull place. Processes leading to the suppression of star formation and morphological transformation are prevalent: this is particularly evident in the dramatic upturn in the fraction of S0-type galaxies in clusters. However, until now, the process and environment of formation remained unidentified. We present a morphological analysis of galaxies in the optically-selected (spectroscopic friends-of-friends) group and field environments at z ∼ 0.4. Groups contain a much higher fraction of S0s at fixed luminosity than the lower density field, with &gt;99.999% confidence. Indeed, the S0 fraction in groups is at least as high as in z ∼ 0.4 clusters and X-ray-selected groups, which have more luminous intragroup medium (IGM). An excess of S0s at ≥0.3h -1 75 Mpc from the group center with respect to the inner regions, existing with 97% confidence at fixed luminosity, tells us that formation is not restricted to, and possibly even avoids, the group cores. Interactions with a bright X-ray-emitting IGM cannot be important for the formation of the majority of S0s in the universe. In contrast to S0s, the fraction of elliptical galaxies in groups at fixed luminosity is similar to the field, while the brightest ellipticals are strongly enhanced toward the group centers (greater than 99.999% confidence within 0.3h -1 75Mpc). Interestingly, while spirals are altogether less common in groups than in the field, there is also an excess of faint, Sc+ type spirals within 0.3h -1 75Mpc of the group centers (99.953% confidence). We conclude that the group and subgroup environments must be dominant for the formation of S0 galaxies, and that minor mergers, galaxy harassment, and tidal interactions are the most likely responsible mechanisms. This has implications not only for the inferred preprocessing of cluster galaxies, but also for the global morphological and star formation budget of galaxies: as hierarchical clustering progresses, more galaxies will be subject to these transformations as they enter the group environment. © 2009. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations154
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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