MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2032521681 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/757/2/122

THE SUPPRESSION OF STAR FORMATION AND THE EFFECT OF THE GALAXY ENVIRONMENT IN LOW-REDSHIFT GALAXY GROUPS

2012· article· en· W2032521681 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteracting galaxyLenticular galaxyGalaxyStar formationGalaxy groupDwarf galaxyGalaxy mergerGalaxy formation and evolutionProtogalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the interaction between galaxies and their surroundings is central to building a coherent picture of galaxy evolution. Here we use Galaxy Evolution Explorer imaging of a statistically representative sample of 23 galaxy groups at z ≈ 0.06 to explore how local and global group environments affect the UV properties and dust-corrected star formation rates (SFRs) of their member galaxies. The data provide SFRs out to beyond 2 R 200 in all groups, down to a completeness limit and limiting galaxy stellar mass of 0.06 M ☉ yr −1 and 1 × 10 8 M ☉ , respectively. At fixed galaxy stellar mass, we find that the fraction of star-forming group members is suppressed relative to the field out to an average radius of R ≈ 1.5 Mpc ≈2 R 200 , mirroring results for massive clusters. For the first time, we also report a similar suppression of the specific SFR within such galaxies, on average by 40% relative to the field, thus directly revealing the impact of the group environment in quenching star formation within infalling galaxies. At fixed galaxy density and stellar mass, this suppression is stronger in more massive groups, implying that both local and global group environments play a role in quenching. The results favor an average quenching timescale of ≳ 2 Gyr and strongly suggest that a combination of tidal interactions and starvation is responsible. Despite their past and ongoing quenching, galaxy groups with more than four members still account for at least ∼25% of the total UV output in the nearby universe.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations81
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→