MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030627151 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/700/1/1

THE<i>CHANDRA</i>DEEP PROTOCLUSTER SURVEY: Lyα BLOBS ARE POWERED BY HEATING, NOT COOLING

2009· article· en· W2030627151 on OpenAlexaff
J. E. Geach, D. M. Alexander, Bret Lehmer, Ian Smail, Yuichi Matsuda, S. C. Chapman, Caleb Scharf, R. J. Ivison, Marta Volonteri, Tōru Yamada, A. W. Blain, R. G. Bower, F. E. Bauer, Antara Basu‐Zych

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersLeverhulme TrustSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationScience and Technology Facilities CouncilSmithsonian Institution
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyActive galactic nucleusLuminosityFlux (metallurgy)PhotoionizationInfraredAstronomyIonizationIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a 400 ks Chandra survey of 29 extended Lyα emitting nebulae (Lyα Blobs, LABs) in the z = 3.09 protocluster in the SS A22 field. We detect luminous X-ray counterparts in five LABs, implying a large fraction of active galactic nuclei (AGN) in LABs,f_(AGN) = 17^(+12)_( 7)% down to L _(2-32 keV) ~ 10^(44) erg s^(–1). All of the AGN appear to be heavily obscured, with spectral indices implying obscuring column densities of N_ H &gt; 10^(23) cm^(–2). The AGN fraction should be considered a lower limit, since several more LABs not detected with Chandra show AGN signatures in their mid-infrared (mid-IR) emission. We show that the UV luminosities of the AGN are easily capable of powering the extended Lyα emission via photoionization alone. When combined with the UV flux from a starburst component, and energy deposited by mechanical feedback, we demonstrate that "heating" by a central source, rather than gravitational cooling is the most likely power source of LABs. We argue that all LABs could be powered in this manner, but that the luminous host galaxies are often just below the sensitivity limits of current instrumentation, or are heavily obscured. No individual LABs show evidence for extended X-ray emission, and a stack equivalent to a ≳ 9 Ms exposure of an average LAB also yields no statistical detection of a diffuse X-ray component. The resulting diffuse X-ray/Lyα luminosity limit implies there is no hot (T≳10^7 K) gas component in these halos, and also rules out inverse Compton scattering of cosmic microwave background photons, or local far-IR photons, as a viable power source for LABs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

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

Citations127
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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