MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2113093682 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/775/1/20

THE RICH GLOBULAR CLUSTER SYSTEM OF ABELL 1689 AND THE RADIAL DEPENDENCE OF THE GLOBULAR CLUSTER FORMATION EFFICIENCY

2013· article· en· W2113093682 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobular clusterGalaxy clusterVirial massGalaxyAbell 2744Cluster (spacecraft)Milky WayGalaxy groups and clustersPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the rich globular cluster (GC) system in the center of the massive cluster of galaxies Abell 1689 ( z = 0.18), one of the most powerful gravitational lenses known. With 28 Hubble Space Telescope /Advanced Camera for Surveys orbits in the F814W bandpass, we reach a magnitude I 814 = 29 with ≳90% completeness and sample the brightest ∼5% of the GC system. Assuming the well-known Gaussian form of the GC luminosity function (GCLF), we estimate a total population of GCs within a projected radius of 400 kpc. As many as half of the GCs may comprise an intracluster component. Even with the sizable uncertainties, which mainly result from the uncertain GCLF parameters, this system is by far the largest GC population studied to date. The specific frequency S N is high, but not uncommon for central galaxies in massive clusters, rising from S N ≈ 5 near the center to ∼12 at large radii. Passive galaxy fading would increase S N by ∼20% at z = 0. We construct the radial mass profiles of the GCs, stars, intracluster gas, and lensing-derived total mass, and we compare the mass fractions as a function of radius. The estimated mass in GCs, = 3.9 × 10 10 M ☉ , is comparable to ∼80% of the total stellar mass of the Milky Way. The shape of the GC mass profile appears intermediate between those of the stellar light and total cluster mass. Despite the extreme nature of this system, the ratios of the GC mass to the baryonic and total masses, and thus the GC formation efficiency, are typical of those in other rich clusters when comparing at the same physical radii. The GC formation efficiency is not constant, but varies with radius, in a manner that appears similar for different clusters; we speculate on the reasons for this similarity in profile.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations67
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→