MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The faint and extremely red K-band-selected galaxy population in the DEEP2/Palomar fields

2008· article· en· W2117280286 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsGalaxyRedshiftPopulationGalaxy formation and evolutionObservatoryPeculiar galaxyLuminous infrared galaxyBrightest cluster galaxyStellar population

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present in this paper an analysis of the faint and red near-infrared (NIR) selected galaxy population found in NIR imaging from the Palomar Observatory Wide-Field Infrared Survey. This survey covers 1.53 deg2 to 5σ detection limits of Kvega= 20.5–21 and Jvega= 22.5, and overlaps with the DEEP2 spectroscopic redshift survey. We discuss the details of this NIR survey, including our J- and K-band counts. We show that the K-band galaxy population has a redshift distribution that varies with K magnitude, with most K < 17 galaxies at z < 1.5 and a significant fraction (38.3 ± 0.3 per cent) of K > 19 systems at z > 1.5. We further investigate the stellar masses and morphological properties of K-selected galaxies, particularly extremely red objects (EROs), as defined by (R−K) > 5.3 and (I−K) > 4. One of our conclusions is that the ERO selection is a good method for picking out galaxies at z > 1.2, and within our magnitude limits, the most massive galaxies at these redshifts. The ERO limit finds 75 per cent of all M* > 1011M⊙ galaxies at z∼ 1.5 down to Kvega= 19.7. We further find that the morphological breakdown of K < 19.7 EROs is dominated by early-types (57 ± 3 per cent) and peculiars (34 ± 3 per cent). However, about a fourth of the early-types are distorted ellipticals, and within CAS (concentration, asymmetry, clumpiness) parameter space these bridge the early-type and peculiar population, suggesting a morphological evolutionary sequence. We also investigate the use of a (I−K) > 4 selection to locate EROs, finding that it selects galaxies at slightly higher average redshifts (〈z〉= 1.43 ± 0.32) than the (R−K) > 5.3 limit with 〈z〉= 1.28 ± 0.23. Finally, by using the redshift distribution of K < 20 selected galaxies, and the properties of our EROs, we are able to rule out all monolithic collapse models for the formation of massive galaxies.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations55
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→