MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High-redshift elliptical galaxies: are they (all) really compact?

2009· article· en· W2147803603 on OpenAlexaff
C. Mancini, E. Daddi, A. Renzini, Fadia Salmi, H. J. McCracken, A. Cimatti, Masato Onodera, M. Salvato, Anton M. Koekemoer, E. Le Floc’h, Chris J. Willott, P. Capak

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyRedshiftHaloSurface brightnessStellar massAstronomyElliptical galaxyStar formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the properties of 12 ultramassive passively evolving early-type galaxies (ETGs) at <it>z</it><inf>phot</inf> > 1.4 in the COSMOS 2 deg2 field. These 12 ETGs were selected as <it>pBzK</it>s, have accurate 1.4 ≲<it>z</it><inf>phot</inf>≲ 1.7, high Sérsic index profiles typical of ellipticals, no detection at 24 μm, resulting in a complete ETG sample at <it>M</it>* > 2.5 × 1011 M<inf>⊙</inf> (Chabrier initial mass function). Contrary to the previous claims, the half-light radii estimated in very high signal-to-noise ratio imaging data from <it>Hubble Space Telescope</it>+Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) are found to be large for most of the sample, consistent with local ellipticals. If the high-redshift ETGs with <it>M</it>* < 2.5 × 1011 M<inf>⊙</inf> are really small in size and compact as reported in the previous studies, our result may suggest a ‘downsizing’ scenario, whereby the most massive ETGs reach their final structure earlier and faster than the lower mass ones. However, simulating galaxies with morphological properties fixed to those of local ETGs with the same stellar mass show that the few compact galaxies that we still recover in our sample can be understood in terms of fluctuations due to noise preventing the recovery of the extended low surface brightness haloes in the light profile. Such haloes, typical of Sérsic profiles, extending even up to 40 kpc, are indeed seen in our sample.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

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

Citations119
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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