The Relation between Star Formation, Morphology, and Local Density in High‐Redshift Clusters and Groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate how the [O II] properties and the morphologies of galaxies in clusters and groups at z = 0.4–0.8 depend on projected local galaxy density, and compare with the field at similar redshifts and clusters at low z. In both nearby and distant clusters, higher density regions contain proportionally fewer star-forming galaxies, and the average [O II] equivalent width of star-forming galaxies is independent of local density. However, in distant clusters the average current star formation rate (SFR) in star-forming galaxies seems to peak at densities ~15-40 galaxies Mpc^−2. At odds with low-z results, at high z the relation between star-forming fraction and local density varies from high- to low-mass clusters. Overall, our results suggest that at high z the current star formation (SF) activity in star-forming galaxies does not depend strongly on global or local environment, though the possible SFR peak seems at odds with this conclusion. We find that the cluster SFR normalized by cluster mass anticorrelates with mass and correlates with the star-forming fraction. These trends can be understood given (1) that the average star-forming galaxy forms about 1⊙M yr^−1 (uncorrected for dust) in all clusters; (2) that the total number of galaxies scales with cluster mass; and (3) the dependence of star-forming fraction on cluster mass. We present the morphology-density (MD) relation for our z = 0.4 − 0.8 clusters, and uncover that the decline of the spiral fraction with density is entirely driven by galaxies of type Sc or later. For galaxies of a given Hubble type, we see no evidence that SF properties depend on local environment. In contrast with recent findings at low z, in our distant clusters the SF-density relation and the MD relation are equivalent, suggesting that neither of the two is more fundamental than the other.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".