EVIDENCE FOR THE UNIVERSALITY OF PROPERTIES OF RED-SEQUENCE GALAXIES IN X-RAY- AND RED-SEQUENCE-SELECTED CLUSTERS AT<i>z</i>∼ 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the slope, intercept, and scatter of the color–magnitude and color–mass relations for a sample of 10 infrared red-sequence-selected clusters at z ∼ 1. The quiescent galaxies in these clusters formed the bulk of their stars above z ≳ 3 with an age spread Δ t ≳ 1 Gyr. We compare UVJ color–color and spectroscopic-based galaxy selection techniques, and find a 15% difference in the galaxy populations classified as quiescent by these methods. We compare the color–magnitude relations from our red-sequence selected sample with X-ray- and photometric-redshift-selected cluster samples of similar mass and redshift. Within uncertainties, we are unable to detect any difference in the ages and star formation histories of quiescent cluster members in clusters selected by different methods, suggesting that the dominant quenching mechanism is insensitive to cluster baryon partitioning at z ∼ 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".