MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054712699 · doi:10.1086/338901

Near-Infrared Adaptive Optics Imaging of the Central Regions of Nearby S[CLC]c[/CLC] Galaxies. II. NGC 247 and NGC 2403

2002· article· en· W2054712699 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. J. Davidge, Stéphane Courteau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsHubble sequenceAstronomyGalaxyRed supergiantLuminous infrared galaxyExtinction (optical mineralogy)Star clusterStar formationLuminosityStarsElliptical galaxySupergiant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

J, H, and K' images obtained with the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope adaptive optics system are used to investigate the star-forming histories of the central regions of the Sc galaxies NGC 247 and NGC 2403. The brightest resolved red stars within 15 arcsec of the nucleus of each galaxy are red supergiants, indicating that the central few hundred parsecs of these galaxies experienced star formation within the last ~ 0.1 Gyr. However, when averaged over Gyr time scales, the star-forming histories of the inner disks of these galaxies have been remarkably similar, as expected if the long-term evolution of disks is defined by local characteristics such as mass density. It is demonstrated that NGC 247 and NGC 2403, like M33, harbour nuclear star clusters with stellar contents that differ from the surrounding central light concentrations. The nucleus of NGC 2403 is significantly bluer than that of the other two galaxies and the K-band surface brightnesses near the centers of NGC 247 and NGC 2403 are 1 -- 2 mag per square arcsec lower than in M33. Finally, it is noted that young or intermediate-age nuclear star clusters are a common occurence in nearby spirals, indicating that nuclear star formation in these objects is either continuous or episodic on time scales of 0.1 - 1 Gyr.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.191
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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207