MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133030092 · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/5/055023

Mechanical feedback from active galactic nuclei in galaxies, groups and clusters

2012· article· en· W2133030092 on OpenAlexaff
B. R. McNamara, P. E. J. Nulsen

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Journal of Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsCooling flowSupermassive black holeAstrophysicsActive galactic nucleusRadiative coolingAstronomyGalaxy clusterElliptical galaxyAccretion (finance)GalaxyStar formationGalaxy group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The radiative cooling timescales at the centers of hot atmospheres surrounding elliptical galaxies, groups and clusters are much shorter than their ages. Therefore, hot atmospheres are expected to cool and to form stars. Cold gas and star formation are observed in central cluster galaxies but at levels below those expected from an unimpeded cooling flow. X-ray observations have shown that wholesale cooling is being offset by mechanical heating from radio active galactic nuclei. Feedback is widely considered to be an important and perhaps unavoidable consequence of the evolution of galaxies and supermassive black holes. We show that cooling x-ray atmospheres and the ensuing star formation and nuclear activity are probably coupled to a self-regulated feedback loop. While the energetics are now reasonably well understood, other aspects of feedback are not. We highlight the problems of atmospheric heating and transport processes, accretion, and nuclear activity, and we discuss the potential role of black hole spin. We discuss x-ray imagery showing that the chemical elements produced by central galaxies are being dispersed on large scales by outflows launched from the vicinity of supermassive black holes. Finally, we comment on the growing evidence for mechanical heating of distant cluster atmospheres by radio jets and its potential consequences for the excess entropy in hot halos and a possible decline in the number of distant cooling flows.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations652
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Journal of PhysicsSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207