MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Ursa Major cluster of galaxies -- III. Optical observations of dwarf galaxies and the luminosity function down to MR = -211

2001· article· en· W2094227104 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirgo ClusterDwarf galaxyLuminosity functionGalaxyCluster (spacecraft)LuminosityGalaxy clusterMass-to-light ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results are presented of a deep optical survey of the Ursa Major cluster, a spiral-rich cluster of galaxies at a distance of 18.6 Mpc which contains about 30 per cent of the light but only 5 per cent of the mass of the nearby Virgo cluster. Fields around known cluster members and a pattern of blind fields along the major and minor axes of the cluster were studied with mosaic CCD cameras on the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope. The dynamical crossing time for the Ursa Major cluster is only slightly less than a Hubble time. Most galaxies in the local Universe exist in similar moderate-density environments. The Ursa Major cluster is therefore a good place to study the statistical properties of dwarf galaxies, since this structure is at an evolutionary stage representative of typical environments, yet has enough galaxies that reasonable counting statistics can be accumulated. The main observational results of our survey are as follows. The galaxy luminosity function is flat, with a logarithmic slope α=−1.1 for −17<MR<−11 from a power-law fit. The error in α is likely to be less than 0.2 and is dominated by systematic errors, primarily associated with uncertainties in assigning membership to specific galaxies. This faint-end slope is quite different from what was seen in the Virgo cluster, where α=−2.26±0.14. Dwarf galaxies are as frequently found to be blue dwarf irregulars as red dwarf spheroidals in the blind cluster fields. The density of red dwarfs is significantly higher in the fields around luminous members than in the blind fields. The most important result is the failure to detect many dwarfs. If the steep luminosity function claimed for the Virgo cluster were valid for Ursa Major, then in our blind fields we should have found ∼103 galaxies with −17<MR<−11 whereas we have found two dozen. There is a clear deficiency of dwarfs compared with the expectations of hierarchical clustering theory. It is speculated that the critical difference between the Virgo and Ursa Major clusters is the very different dynamical collapse times, which probably straddle the time-scale for reionization of the Universe. Dwarf galaxies in the proto-Virgo environment probably formed before the epoch of reionization. The equivalent dwarf haloes in the proto-Ursa Major environment probably formed only after the epoch of reionization, when the conditions for star formation were inhospitable.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations55
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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