MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The H<b>α</b>luminosity function and star formation rate up to<b>z ∼ 1</b>

2002· article· en· W2058301625 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyRedshiftStar formationBalmer seriesLuminosityLuminosity functionLine (geometry)Emission spectrumLuminous infrared galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe ISAAC/ESO-VLT observations of the Hαλ6563 Balmer line of 33 field galaxies from the Canada—France Redshift Survey (CFRS) with redshifts selected between 0.5 and 1.1. We detect Hα in emission in 30 galaxies and compare the properties of this sample with the low-redshift sample of CFRS galaxies at z∼ 0.2. We find that the Hα luminosity, L(Hα), is tightly correlated to M(BAB) in the same way for both the low- and high-redshift samples. L(Hα) is also correlated to L([O ii]λ3727), and again the relation appears to be similar at low and high redshifts. The ratio L(lsqb;O ii])/L(Hα) decreases for brighter galaxies by as much as a factor of 2 on average. Derived from the Hα luminosity function, the comoving Hα luminosity density increases by a factor 12 from 〈z〉= 0.2 to 〈z〉= 1.3. Our results confirm a strong rise of the star formation rate (SFR) at z < 1.3, proportional to (1 +z)4.1±0.3 (with H0 = 50 km s−1 Mpc−1, q0 = 0.5). We find an average SFR(2800 Å)/SFR (Hα) ratio of 3.2 using the Kennicutt SFR transformations. This corresponds to the dust correction that is required to make the near-ultraviolet data consistent with the reddening-corrected Hα data within the self-contained, I-selected CFRS sample.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations108
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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