MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The accretion of galaxies into groups and clusters

2009· article· en· W2146425874 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGalaxy clusterHaloBrightest cluster galaxyGalaxy groupGalaxyAccretion (finance)RedshiftPeculiar galaxyLenticular galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use the galaxy stellar mass and halo merger tree information from the semi-analytic model galaxy catalogue of Font et al. to examine the accretion of galaxies into a large sample of groups and clusters, covering a wide range in halo mass (1012.9 to 1015.3h−1 M⊙), and selected from each of four redshift epochs (z= 0, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5). We find that clusters at all examined redshifts have accreted a significant fraction of their final galaxy populations through galaxy groups. A 1014.5h−1 M⊙ mass cluster at z= 0 has, on average, accreted ∼40 per cent of its galaxies (Mstellar > 109h−1 M⊙) from haloes with masses greater than 1013h−1 M⊙. Further, the galaxies which are accreted through groups are more massive, on average, than the galaxies accreted through smaller haloes or from the field population. We find that at a given epoch, the fraction of galaxies accreted from isolated environments is independent of the final cluster or group mass. In contrast, we find that observing a cluster of the same halo mass at each redshift epoch implies different accretion rates of isolated galaxies, from 5 to 6 per cent per Gyr at z= 0 to 15 per cent per Gyr at z= 1.5. We find that combining the existence of a Butcher–Oemler effect at z= 0.5 and the observations that galaxies within groups display significant environmental effects with galaxy accretion histories justifies striking conclusions. Namely that the dominant environmental process must begin to occur in haloes of 1012–1013h−1 M⊙, and act over time-scales of >2 Gyr. This argues in favour of a mechanism like ‘strangulation’, in which the hot halo of a galaxy is stripped upon infalling into a more massive halo. This simple model predicts that by z= 1.5 galaxy groups and clusters will display little to no environmental effects. This conclusion may limit the effectiveness of red sequence cluster-finding methods at high redshift.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations326
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207