MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202583193 · doi:10.1515/phys-2015-0034

Age-density relation of Main galaxies at fixed parameters or fordifferent galaxy families

2015· article· en· W2202583193 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xin‐Fa Deng, Jun Song, Yiqing Chen, Peng Jiang, Ying-Ping Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaYork UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityOhio State UniversityNew Mexico State UniversityVanderbilt UniversityYale UniversityUniversity of PortsmouthNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonAlfred P. Sloan FoundationUniversity of ArizonaPrinceton UniversityBrookhaven National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsAstrophysicsPhysicsLenticular galaxyGalaxy groupPeculiar galaxyInteracting galaxyBrightest cluster galaxyLuminous infrared galaxyElliptical galaxyGalaxySkyGalaxy mergerSurface brightness fluctuationAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using two volume-limited Main galaxy samples of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 10 (SDSS DR10), we examine the environmental dependence of galaxy age at fixed parameters or for different galaxy families. Statistical results show that the environmental dependence of galaxy age is stronger for late type galaxies, but can be still observed for the early types: the age of galaxies in the densest regime is preferentially older than that in the lowest density regime with the same morphological type. We also find that the environmental dependence of galaxy age for red galaxies and Low Stellar Mass (LSM) galaxies is stronger, while the one for blue galaxies and High Stellar Mass ( HSM ) galaxies is very weak.

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)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen PhysicsSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207