LoCuSS: Probing galaxy transformation physics with<i>Herschel</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an early broad-brush analysis of Herschel/PACS observations of star-forming galaxies in 8 galaxy clusters drawn from our survey of 30 clusters at z 0.2. We define a complete sample of 192 spectroscopically confirmed cluster members down to LTIR > 3 × 1010 and LK > 0.25 . The average K-band and bolometric infrared luminosities of these galaxies both fade by a factor of ~2 from clustercentric radii of ~2 r200 to ~0.5 r200, indicating that as galaxies enter the clusters ongoing star-formation stops first in the most massive galaxies, and that the specific star-formation rate (SSFR) is conserved. On smaller scales the average SSFR jumps by ~25%, suggesting that in cluster cores processes including ram pressure stripping may trigger a final episode of star-formation that presumably exhausts the remaining gas. This picture is consistent with our comparison of the Herschel-detected cluster members with the cluster mass distributions, as measured in our previous weak-lensing study of these clusters. For example, the spatial distribution of the Herschel sources is positively correlated with the structures in the weak-lensing mass maps at ~5σ significance, with the strongest signal seen at intermediate group-like densities. The strong dependence of the total cluster IR luminosity on cluster mass – LTIR Mvirial2 – is also consistent with accretion of galaxies and groups of galaxies (i.e. the substructure mass function) driving the cluster IR luminosity. The most surprising result is that roughly half of the Herschel-detected cluster members have redder S100/S24 flux ratios than expected, based on the Rieke et al. models. On average cluster members are redder than non-members, and the fraction of red galaxies increases towards the cluster centers, both of which indicate that these colors are not attributable to systematic photometric errors. Our future goals include to intepret physically these red galaxies, and to exploit this unique large sample of clusters with unprecedented multi-wavelength observations to measure the cluster-cluster scatter in S0 progenitor populations, and to intepret that scatter in the context of the hierarchical assembly of clusters.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".