MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094353177 · doi:10.1086/312560

Caltech Faint Galaxy Redshift Survey. XI. The Merger Rate to Redshift 1 from Kinematic Pairs

2000· article· en· W2094353177 on OpenAlexaffabout
R. G. Carlberg, Judith G. Cohen, David R. Patton, R. D. Blandford, David W. Hogg, H. K. C. Yee, S. L. Morris, H. Lin, Patrick B. Hall, Marcin Sawicki, Gregory D. Wirth, L. L. Cowie, E. M. Hu, A. Songaila

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsDominion Astrophysical ObservatoryHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyRedshift surveyLuminosityGalaxy formation and evolutionAstronomyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of mass accumulation due to galaxy merging depends on the mass, density, and velocity distribution of galaxies in the near neighborhood of a host galaxy. The fractional luminosity in kinematic pairs combines all of these effects in a single estimator that is relatively insensitive to population evolution. Here we use a k-corrected and evolution-compensated volume-limited sample having an R-band absolute magnitude of Mk,eR</=-19.8+5logh mag drawing about 300 redshifts from the Caltech Faint Galaxy Redshift Survey and 3000 from the Canadian Network for Observational Cosmology field galaxy survey to measure the rate and redshift evolution of merging. The combined sample has an approximately constant comoving number and luminosity density from redshift 0.1 to 1.1 (OmegaM=0.2, OmegaLambda=0.8); hence, any merger evolution will be dominated by correlation and velocity evolution, not density evolution. We identify kinematic pairs with projected separations less than either 50 or 100 h-1 kpc and rest-frame velocity differences of less than 1000 km s-1. The fractional luminosity in pairs is modeled as fL&parl0;Deltav,rp,Mk,er&parr0;&parl0;1+z&parr0;mL, where &sqbl0;fL,mL&sqbr0; are &sqbl0;0.14+/-0.07,0+/-1.4&sqbr0; and &sqbl0;0.37+/-0.7,0.1+/-0.5&sqbr0; for rp</=50 and 100 h-1 kpc, respectively (OmegaM=0.2, OmegaLambda=0.8). The value of mL is about 0.6 larger if Lambda=0. To convert these redshift-space statistics to a merger rate, we use the data to derive a conversion factor to a physical space pair density, a merger probability, and a mean in-spiral time. The resulting mass accretion rate per galaxy (M1,M2>/=0.2M*) is 0.02+/-0.01&parl0;1+z&parr0;0.1+/-0.5M* Gyr-1. Present-day high-luminosity galaxies therefore have accreted approximately 0.15M* of their mass over the approximately 7 Gyr to redshift 1. Since merging is likely only weakly dependent on the host mass, the fractional effect, deltaM&solm0;M approximately 0.15M*&solm0;M, is dramatic for lower mass galaxies but is, on the average, effectively perturbative for galaxies above 1M*.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.010

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations85
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207