MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2278985074 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2856

NIHAO – IV: core creation and destruction in dark matter density profiles across cosmic time

2016· article· en· W2278985074 on OpenAlexaff
Édouard Tollet, Andrea V. Macciò, Aaron A. Dutton, G. S. Stinson, Liang Wang, Camilla Penzo, Thales A. Gutcke, Tobias Buck, Xi Kang, Chris B. Brook, Arianna Di Cintio, Ben Keller, James Wadsley

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsDark matterDark matter haloHaloGalaxyCuspy halo problemGalaxy formation and evolutionAstronomyDwarf galaxyRADIUSCold dark matterDwarf galaxy problemCOSMIC cancer databaseVirial theoremRedshift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use the NIHAO (Numerical Investigation of Hundred Astrophysical Objects) cosmological simulations to investigate the effects of baryonic physics on the time evolution of dark matter central density profiles. The sample is made of ≈70 independent high-resolution hydrodynamical simulations of galaxy formation and covers a wide mass range: 1010 ≲ Mhalo/M⊙ ≲ 1012, i.e. from dwarfs to L⋆. We confirm previous results on the dependence of the inner dark matter density slope, α, on the ratio between stellar-to-halo mass, Mstar/Mhalo. We show that this relation holds approximately at all redshifts (with an intrinsic scatter of ∼0.18 in α measured between 1 and 2 per cent of the virial radius). This implies that in practically all haloes the shape of their inner density profile changes quite substantially over cosmic time, as they grow in stellar and total mass. Thus, depending on their final Mstar/Mhalo ratio, haloes can either form and keep a substantial density core (Rcore ∼ 1 kpc), or form and then destroy the core and recontract the halo, going back to a cuspy profile, which is even steeper than cold-dark-matter predictions for massive galaxies (1012 M⊙). We show that results from the NIHAO suite are in good agreement with recent observational measurements of α in dwarf galaxies. Overall our results suggest that the notion of a universal density profile for dark matter haloes is no longer valid in the presence of galaxy formation.

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)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations299
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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