MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Revised masses of dust and gas of SCUBA Local Universe Survey far-infrared bright galaxies based on a recent CO survey

2004· article· en· W2060254642 on OpenAlexaff
E. R. Seaquist, Lihong Yao, L. Dunne, Heather Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyMetallicityLuminosityAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent CO measurements of an essentially complete subsample of galaxies from the SCUBA Local Universe Survey (SLUGS) are used to examine their implications for dust and gas masses in this sample. Estimates of dust masses are affected by a contribution to the SCUBA brightness measurements by CO(3–2) emission, and molecular gas masses by the use of a modified value of the CO-to-H2 conversion factor X. The average dust mass is reduced by 25–38 per cent, which has no bearing on earlier conclusions concerning the shape of the dust mass luminosity function derived from the SLUGS. The value of X found from the CO survey, when applied together with the reduction in dust masses, leads to lower estimates for the mean gas-to-dust mass ratios, where the gas includes both H2 and H i. For the CO sample, the mean global ratio is reduced from approximately 430 to about 320–360, but is further reduced to values near 50 when applied to the nuclear regions relevant to the CO observations. We discuss these results and suggest that the differences between the nuclear and outer regions may simply reflect differences in metallicity or the existence of considerable amounts of unobserved cold dust in the outer regions of these galaxies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations54
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→