MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040507767 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slu188

Mass-segregation trends in SDSS galaxy groups

2014· article· en· W2040507767 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Roberts, Laura C. Parker, Gandhali D Joshi, Fraser A. Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyStellar massHaloGalaxy formation and evolutionGalaxy groupAstronomyRedshiftRADIUSMass segregationInteracting galaxyGalaxy mergerStar formationGlobular cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It has been shown that galaxy properties depend strongly on their host environment. In order to understand the relevant physical processes driving galaxy evolution it is important to study the observed properties of galaxies in different environments. Mass segregation in bound galaxy structures is an important indicator of evolutionary history and dynamical friction time-scales. Using group catalogues derived from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 7 (SDSS DR7), we investigate mass-segregation trends in galaxy groups at low redshift. We investigate average galaxy stellar mass as a function of group-centric radius and find evidence for weak mass segregation in SDSS groups. The magnitude of the mass segregation depends on both galaxy stellar mass limits and group halo mass. We show that the inclusion of low-mass galaxies tends to strengthen mass-segregation trends, and that the strength of mass segregation tends to decrease with increasing group halo mass. We find the same trends if we use the fraction of massive galaxies as a function of group-centric radius as an alternative probe of mass segregation. The magnitude of mass segregation that we measure, particularly in high-mass haloes, indicates that dynamical friction is not acting efficiently.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207