MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Confronting theoretical models with the observed evolution of the galaxy population out to z= 4

2012· article· en· W2152406263 on OpenAlexaff
Bruno Henriques, Simon D. M. White, Gerard Lemson, P. Thomas, Qi Guo, Gabriel-Dominique Marleau, Roderik Overzier

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsPhysicsGalaxy formation and evolutionGalaxyAstronomyAstrophysicsPopulationGalaxy mergerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We construct light cones for the semi‐analytic galaxy formation simulation of Guo et al. and make mock catalogues for comparison with deep high‐redshift surveys. Photometric properties are calculated with two different stellar population synthesis codes in order to study sensitivity to this aspect of the modelling. The catalogues are publicly available and include photometry for a large number of observed bands from 4000 Å to 6 μ m, as well as rest‐frame photometry and other intrinsic properties of the galaxies (e.g. positions, peculiar velocities, stellar masses, sizes, morphologies, gas fractions, star formation rates, metallicities, halo properties). Guo et al. tuned their model to fit the low‐redshift galaxy population but noted that at z≥ 1 it overpredicts the abundance of galaxies below the ‘knee’ of the stellar mass function. Here we extend the comparison to deep galaxy counts in the B, i, J, K and IRAC 3.6, 4.5 and 5.8 μ m bands, to the redshift distributions of K and 5.8 μ m selected galaxies, the evolution of rest‐frame luminosity functions in the B and K bands and the evolution of rest‐frame optical versus near‐infrared colours. The B, i and J counts are well reproduced, but at longer wavelengths the overabundant high‐redshift galaxies produce excess faint counts. At bright magnitudes, counts in the IRAC bands are underpredicted, reflecting overly low stellar metallicities and the neglect of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon emission. The predicted redshift distributions for K and 5.8 μ m selected samples highlight the effect of emission from thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars. The full treatment of the Maraston model predicts three times as many z∼ 2 galaxies in faint 5.8 μ m selected samples as the model of Bruzual & Charlot, whereas the two models give similar predictions for K‐band selected samples. Although luminosity functions are adequately reproduced out to z∼ 3 in rest‐frame B, the same is true at rest‐frame K only if thermally pulsating AGB emission is included, and then only at high luminosity. Fainter than L★, the two synthesis models agree but overpredict the number of galaxies, another reflection of the overabundance of ∼1010 M⊙ model galaxies at z≥ 1. The model predicts that red, passive galaxies should already be in place at z= 2 as required by observations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations135
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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