MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Resurrecting the red from the dead: optical properties of BCGs in X-ray luminous clusters★

2008· article· en· W2159419348 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotometry (optics)GalaxySurface brightnessCluster (spacecraft)MetallicityStar formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present measurements of surface brightness and colour profiles for the brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) in a sample of 48 X-ray luminous galaxy clusters. These data were obtained as part of the Canadian Cluster Comparison Project (CCCP). The Kormendy relation of our BCGs is steeper than that of the local ellipticals, suggesting differences in the assembly history of these types of systems. We also find that while most BCGs show monotonic colour gradients consistent with a decrease in metallicity with radius, 25 per cent of the BCGs show colour profiles that turn bluer towards the centre (blue cores). We interpret this bluing trend as evidence for recent star formation. The excess blue light leads to a typical offset from the red sequence of 0.5 to 1.0 mag in (g′−r′), thus affecting optical cluster studies that may reject the BCG based on colour. All of the blue-core BCGs are located within ∼10 kpc of the peak in the cluster X-ray emission. Furthermore, virtually all of the BCGs with recent star formation are in clusters that lie above the Lx–Tx relation. Based on photometry alone, these findings suggest that central star formation is a ubiquitous feature of BCGs in dynamically relaxed cool-core clusters. This implies that while active galactic nuclei (AGNs) and other heating mechanisms are effective at tempering cooling, they do not full compensate for the energy lost via radiation.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations149
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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