MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tracking down a critical halo mass for killing galaxies through the growth of the red sequence

2008· article· en· W2073915977 on OpenAlexaff
David Gilbank, Michael L. Balogh

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrophysicsPhysicsGalaxyRedshiftAstronomyGalaxy formation and evolutionHaloGalaxy cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Red-sequence galaxies record the history of terminated star formation in the Universe and can thus provide important clues to the mechanisms responsible for this termination. We construct composite samples of published cluster and field galaxy photometry in order to study the build-up of galaxies on the red sequence, as parametrized by the dwarf-to-giant ratio (DGR). We find that the DGR in clusters is higher than that of the field at all redshifts, implying that the faint end of the red sequence was established first in clusters. We find that the DGR evolves with redshift for both samples, consistent with the ‘down-sizing’ picture of star formation. We examine the predictions of semi-analytic models for the DGR and find that neither the magnitude of its environmental dependence nor its evolution is correctly predicted in the models. Red-sequence DGRs are consistently too high in the models, the most likely explanation being that the strangulation mechanism used to remove hot gas from satellite galaxies is too efficient. Finally, we present a simple toy model including a threshold mass, below which galaxies are not strangled, and show that this can predict the observed evolution of the field DGR.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations52
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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