The incidence of bar-like kinematic flows in CALIFA galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We carry out a direct search for bar-like non-circular flows in intermediate-inclination, gas-rich disc galaxies with a range of morphological types and photometric bar classifications from the first data release (DR1) of the Calar Alto Legacy Integral Field Spectroscopy Area (CALIFA) survey. We use the diskfit algorithm to apply rotation only and bisymmetric flow models to H α velocity fields for 49/100 CALIFA DR1 systems that meet our selection criteria. We find satisfactory fits for a final sample of 37 systems. diskfit is sensitive to the radial or tangential components of a bar-like flow with amplitudes greater than 15 km s−1 across at least two independent radial bins in the fit, or ∼2.25 kpc at the characteristic final sample distance of ∼75 Mpc. The velocity fields of 25/37 |${(67.6^{+6.6}_{-8.5}\,\mathrm{per\ cent})}$| galaxies are best characterized by pure rotation, although only 17/25 |${(68.0^{+7.7}_{-10.4}\,\mathrm{per\ cent})}$| of them have sufficient H α emission near the galaxy centre to afford a search for non-circular flows. We detect non-circular flows in the remaining 12/37 |${(32.4^{+8.5}_{-6.6}\,\mathrm{per\ cent})}$| galaxies. We conclude that the non-circular flows detected in 11/12 |${(91.7^{+2.8}_{-14.9}\,\mathrm{per\ cent})}$| systems stem from bars. Galaxies with intermediate (AB) bars are largely undetected, and our detection thresholds therefore represent upper limits to the amplitude of the non-circular flows therein. We find 2/23 |${(8.7^{+9.6}_{-2.9}\,\mathrm{per\ cent})}$| galaxies that show non-circular motions consistent with a bar-like flow, yet no photometric bar is evident. This suggests that in ∼10 per cent of galaxies either the existence of a bar may be missed completely in photometry or other processes may drive bar-like flows and thus secular galaxy evolution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".