MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2034411092 · doi:10.1086/322246

<i>FUSE</i>Observations of Cooling‐Flow Gas in the Galaxy Clusters A1795 and A2597

2001· article· en· W2034411092 on OpenAlexaff
W. R. Oegerle, L. L. Cowie, A. F. Davidsen, E. M. Hu, J. B. Hutchings, E. M. Murphy, Kenneth R. Sembach, B. E. Woodgate

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical Observatory
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsPhysicsFlux (metallurgy)Intracluster mediumLine (geometry)Cooling flowGalaxyEmission spectrumExtinction (optical mineralogy)Atomic physicsGalaxy clusterSpectral lineAstronomyChemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present far-ultraviolet spectroscopy of the cores of the massive cooling-flow clusters Abell 1795 and 2597, obtained with the Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer . As the intracluster gas cools through 3 × 10 5 K, it should emit strongly in the O VI λλ1032, 1038 resonance lines. We report the detection of O VI λ1032 emission in A2597, with a line flux of × 10 -15 ergs cm -2 s -1 , as well as detection of emission from C III λ977. A marginal detection of C III λ977 emission is also reported for A1795. These observations provide evidence for a direct link between the hot (10 7 K) cooling-flow gas and the cool (10 4 K) gas in the optical emission line filaments. Assuming simple cooling-flow models, the O VI line flux in A2597 corresponds to a mass deposition rate of ~40 M ☉ yr -1 within the central 36 kpc. Emission from O VI λ1032 was not detected in A1795, with an upper limit of 1.5 × 10 -15 ergs cm -2 s -1 , corresponding to a limit on the mass cooling-flow rate of (28 kpc) < 28 M ☉ yr -1 . We have considered several explanations for the lack of detection of O VI emission in A1795 and the weaker than expected flux in A2597, including extinction by dust in the outer cluster and quenching of thermal conduction by magnetic fields. We conclude that a turbulent mixing model, with some dust extinction, could explain our O VI results while also accounting for the puzzling lack of emission by Fe XVII in cluster cooling flows.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations59
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→