The Globular Cluster Systems in the Coma Ellipticals. I. The Luminosity Function in NGC 4874 and Implications for Hubble’s Constant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have used deep Hubble Space Telescope WFPC2 images in V (F606W) and I (F814W) to measure the luminosity distribution of the globular clusters in NGC 4874, the central cD galaxy of the Coma cluster. We find the "turnover" point of the globular cluster luminosity function (GCLF) to lie at V = 27.88 ± 0.12, while the overall GCLF shape matches the standard Gaussian-like form with dispersion σ V = 1.49 ± 0.12. We use the GCLF as a standard candle by matching the turnover points in NGC 4874 and another Coma elliptical, IC 4051, with those of the giant ellipticals in the Virgo cluster (M87 and five others). The result is Δ( m - M ) (Coma-Virgo) = 4.06 ± 0.11 mag, which converts to a Coma distance d = 102 Mpc if the Virgo distance modulus is ( m - M ) 0 = 30.99 ± 0.04. The Hubble constant which emerges from our GCLF measurement is then H 0 = (69 ± 9) km s -1 Mpc -1 . We confirm this H 0 value with a novel presentation of the "Hubble diagram" for GCLFs in giant E galaxies. Measurements of additional GCLFs in the Coma ellipticals, as well as calibrating galaxies in Virgo and Fornax, have excellent potential to refine this result in the near future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".