Accurate Realizations of the Ionized Gas in Galaxy Clusters: Calibrating Feedback
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the full, three-dimensional potential of galaxy cluster halos (drawn from an N -body simulation of the current, most favored cosmology), the distribution of the X-ray-emitting gas is found by assuming a polytropic equation of state and hydrostatic equilibrium with constraints from conservation of energy and pressure balance at the cluster boundary. The resulting properties of the gas for these simulated redshift zero clusters (the temperature distribution, mass-temperature and luminosity-temperature relations, and the gas fraction) are compared with observations in the X-ray of nearby clusters. The observed properties are reproduced only under the assumption that substantial energy injection from nongravitational sources has occurred. Our model does not specify the source, but star formation and active galactic nuclei (AGNs) may be capable of providing this energy, which amounts to (3-5) × 10 -5 of the rest mass in stars (assuming 10% of the gas initially in the cluster forms stars). With the method described here, it is possible to generate realistic X-ray and Sunyaev-Zel'dovich cluster maps and catalogs from N -body simulations with the distributions of internal halo properties (and their trends with mass, location, and time) taken into account.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".