MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2150107548 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1020

The stellar mass–size relation for the most isolated galaxies in the local Universe★

2013· article· en· W2150107548 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. Fernández Lorenzo, J. W. Sulentic, L. Verdes‐Montenegro, M. Argudo–Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryAstrophysics DivisionCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónYork UniversityUniversity of ArizonaJohns Hopkins UniversityOhio State UniversityNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of PortsmouthYale UniversityVanderbilt UniversityJunta de AndalucíaNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonAlfred P. Sloan FoundationBrookhaven National LaboratoryU.S. Department of EnergyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationPrinceton University
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyAstronomyStellar massUniverseRelation (database)Star formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disentangling processes governing the formation and evolution of galaxies is a fundamental challenge in extragalactic research. In this sense, the current belief that galaxies grow by the action of minor mergers makes the study of the stellar mass–size relation in different environments an important tool for distinguishing effects of internal and external processes. The aim of this work is to study the effects of environment on the growth in size of galaxies. As part of Analysis of the Interstellar Medium of Isolated GAlaxies (AMIGA project), we examine the stellar mass–size relation for a sample of the most isolated galaxies in the local Universe interpreted as stellar systems where evolution has been mainly governed by internal processes. Effects of environment on the stellar mass–size relation are evaluated by comparing our results with samples of less isolated early- and late-type galaxies, as well as, for the first time, different spiral subtypes. Stellar masses in our sample were derived by fitting the SED of each galaxy with kcorrect. We used two different size estimators, the half-light radius obtained with SExtractor and the effective radius calculated by fitting a Sérsic profile to the i-band image of each galaxy using galfit. We found good agreement between those size estimators when the Sérsic index fell in the range 2.5 < n < 4.5 and 0.5 < n < 2.5 for (visually classified) early- and late-type galaxies, respectively. We find no difference in the stellar mass–size relation for very isolated and less isolated early-type galaxies. We find that late-type isolated galaxies are ∼1.2 times larger than less isolated objects with similar mass. Isolated galaxies and comparison samples were divided into six morphological ranges (E/S0, Spirals, Sb, Sbc, Sc and Scd–Sdm) and five stellar mass bins between log (M*) = [9,11.5]. In all cases, the relation is better defined and has less scatter for the isolated galaxies. We find that as the morphological type becomes later the galaxy size (for a fixed stellar mass range) becomes larger. For the lowest stellar mass bins log (M*) = [9,10], we find good agreement between sizes of AMIGA and comparison spirals (both mostly composed of Scd–Sdm types). The isolated spiral galaxies in the high stellar mass bins log (M*) = [10,11] tend to be larger than less isolated galaxies. This difference in size is found for all spiral subtypes and becomes larger when we compare fully isolated galaxies with galaxies having two or more satellites (neighbours within 3 mag of difference at a distance less than 250 kpc from the galaxy). Our results suggest that massive spiral galaxies located in low-density environments, both in terms of major companions and satellites, have larger sizes than samples of less isolated galaxies. Hence, the environment has played a role in the growth in size of massive spiral 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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations75
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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