Gemini Deep Deep Survey. VI. Massive Hδ‐strong Galaxies at<i>z</i>≃ 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show that there has been a dramatic decline in the abundance of massive galaxies with strong Hδ stellar absorption lines from z ~ 1.2 to the present. These "Hδ-strong" (HDS) galaxies have undergone a recent and rapid break in their star formation activity. Combining data from the Gemini Deep Deep and Sloan Digital Sky surveys to make mass-matched samples ( M ⋆ > 10 10.2 M ☉ ; with 25 and 50,255 galaxies, respectively), we find that the fraction of galaxies in an HDS phase has decreased from about 50% at z = 1.2 to a few percent today. This decrease in fraction is due to an actual decrease in the number density of massive HDS systems by a factor of 2-4, coupled with an increase in the number density of massive galaxies by ~30%. We show that this result depends only weakly on the threshold chosen for the Hδ equivalent width (EW) to define HDS systems (if greater than 4 Å) and corresponds to a (1 + z ) 2.5±0.7 evolution. Spectral synthesis studies of the high-redshift population using the PÉGASE code, treating Hδ A , EW[O II], D n 4000, and rest-frame colors, favor models in which the Balmer absorption features in massive HDS systems are the echoes of intense episodes of star formation that faded ≃1 Gyr prior to the epoch of observation. The z = 1.4-2 epoch appears to correspond to a time at which massive galaxies are in transition from a mode of sustained star formation to a relatively quiescent mode with weak and rare star formation episodes. We argue that the most likely local descendants of the distant massive HDS galaxies are passively evolving massive galaxies in the field and small groups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.010 |
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.
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".