Mass profiles and anisotropies of early-type galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We discuss the problem of using stellar kinematics of early-type galaxies to constrain the orbital anisotropies and radial mass profiles of galaxies. We demonstrate that compressing the light distribution of a galaxy along the line of sight produces approximately the same signature in the line-of-sight velocity profiles as radial anisotropy. In particular, fitting spherically symmetric dynamical models to apparently round, isotropic face-on flattened galaxies leads to a spurious bias towards radial orbits in the models, especially if the galaxy has a weak face-on stellar disc. Such face-on stellar discs could plausibly be the cause of the radial anisotropy found in spherical models of intermediate luminosity ellipticals such as NGC 2434, 3379 and 6703. In the light of this result, we use simple dynamical models to constrain the outer mass profiles of a sample of 18 round, early-type galaxies. The galaxies follow a Tully—Fisher relation parallel to that for spiral galaxies, but fainter by at least 0.8 mag (I-band) for a given mass. The most luminous galaxies show clear evidence for the presence of a massive dark halo, but the case for dark haloes in fainter galaxies is more ambiguous. We discuss the observations that would be required to resolve this ambiguity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".