MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111924678 · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/182/1/12

INTRACLUSTER MEDIUM ENTROPY PROFILES FOR A <i>CHANDRA</i> ARCHIVAL SAMPLE OF GALAXY CLUSTERS

2009· article· en· W2111924678 on OpenAlexaff
K. W. Cavagnolo, Megan Donahue, G. Mark Voit, Ming Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsIntracluster mediumFlatteningGalaxy clusterPower lawPopulationCluster (spacecraft)GalaxyObservatoryEntropy (arrow of time)AstronomyStatisticsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present radial entropy profiles of the intracluster medium (ICM) for a collection of 239 clusters taken from the Chandra X-ray Observatory's Data Archive. Entropy is of great interest because it controls ICM global properties and records the thermal history of a cluster. Entropy is therefore a useful quantity for studying the effects of feedback on the cluster environment and investigating any breakdown of cluster self-similarity. We find that most ICM entropy profiles are well fitted by a model which is a power law at large radii and approaches a constant value at small radii: K ( r ) = K 0 + K 100 ( r /100 kpc) α , where K 0 quantifies the typical excess of core entropy above the best-fitting power law found at larger radii. We also show that the K 0 distributions of both the full archival sample and the primary Highest X-Ray Flux Galaxy Cluster Sample of Reiprich (2001) are bimodal with a distinct gap between K 0 ≈ 30–50 keV cm 2 and population peaks at K 0 ∼ 15 keV cm 2 and K 0 ∼ 150 keV cm 2 . The effects of point-spread function smearing and angular resolution on best-fit K 0 values are investigated using mock Chandra observations and degraded entropy profiles, respectively. We find that neither of these effects is sufficient to explain the entropy-profile flattening we measure at small radii. The influence of profile curvature and number of radial bins on best-fit K 0 is also considered, and we find no indication that K 0 is significantly impacted by either. For completeness, we include previously unpublished optical spectroscopy of Hα and [N ii ] emission lines discussed in Cavagnolo et al. (2008a). All data and results associated with this work are publicly available via the project Web site.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations567
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal Supplement SeriesSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207