MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054929031 · doi:10.1086/591240

The Regulation of Cooling and Star Formation in Luminous Galaxies by Active Galactic Nucleus Feedback and the Cooling‐Time/Entropy Threshold for the Onset of Star Formation

2008· article· en· W2054929031 on OpenAlexaff
D. A. Rafferty, B. R. McNamara, P. E. J. Nulsen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsActive galactic nucleusIntracluster mediumStar formationSupermassive black holeAstronomyGalaxyVirgo ClusterGalaxy clusterCooling flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using broadband optical imaging and Chandra X-ray data for a sample of 46 cluster central dominant galaxies (CDGs), we investigate the connection between star formation, the intracluster medium (ICM), and the central active galactic nucleus (AGN). We report the discovery of a remarkably sharp threshold for the onset of star formation that occurs when the central cooling time of the hot atmosphere falls below ~ 5x10^8 yr, or equivalently when the central entropy falls below ~ 30 keV cm^2. In addition to this criterion, star formation in cooling flows also appears to require that the X-ray and galaxy centroids lie within ~ 20 kpc of each other, and that the jet (cavity) power is smaller than the X-ray cooling luminosity. These three criteria, together with the high ratio of cooling time to AGN outburst (cavity) age across our sample, directly link the presence of star formation and AGN activity in CDGs to cooling instabilities in the intracluster plasma. Our results provide compelling evidence that AGN feedback into the hot ICM is largely responsible for regulating cooling and star formation in the cores of clusters, leading to the significant growth of supermassive black holes in CDGs at late times.

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)0.001
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 score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations258
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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