CFHTLenS: the environmental dependence of galaxy halo masses from weak lensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use weak gravitational lensing to analyse the dark matter haloes around satellite galaxies in galaxy groups in the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS) data set. This data set is derived from the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey Wide survey, and encompasses 154 deg2 of high-quality shape data. Using the photometric redshifts, we divide the sample of lens galaxies with stellar masses in the range 109–1010.5 M⊙ into those likely to lie in high-density environments (HDE) and those likely to lie in low-density environments (LDE). Through comparison with galaxy catalogues extracted from the Millennium Simulation, we show that the sample of HDE galaxies should primarily (∼61 per cent) consist of satellite galaxies in groups, while the sample of LDE galaxies should consist of mostly (∼87 per cent) non-satellite (field and central) galaxies. Comparing the lensing signals around samples of HDE and LDE galaxies matched in stellar mass, the lensing signal around HDE galaxies clearly shows a positive contribution from their host groups on their lensing signals at radii of ∼500–1000 kpc, the typical separation between satellites and group centres. More importantly, the subhaloes of HDE galaxies are less massive than those around LDE galaxies by a factor of 0.65 ± 0.12, significant at the 2.9σ level. A natural explanation is that the haloes of satellite galaxies are stripped through tidal effects in the group environment. Our results are consistent with a typical tidal truncation radius of ∼40 kpc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".