Mergers and the outside-in formation of dwarf spheroidals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use a cosmological simulation of the formation of the Local Group to explore the origin of age and metallicity gradients in dwarf spheroidal galaxies. We find that a number of simulated dwarfs form ‘outside-in’, with an old, metal-poor population that surrounds a younger, more concentrated metal-rich component, reminiscent of dwarf spheroidals like Sculptor or Sextans. We focus on a few examples where stars form in two populations distinct in age in order to elucidate the origin of these gradients. The spatial distributions of the two components reflect their diverse origin; the old stellar component is assembled through mergers, but the young population forms largely in situ. The older component results from a first episode of star formation that begins early but is quickly shut off by the combined effects of stellar feedback and reionization. The younger component forms when a late accretion event adds gas and reignites star formation. The effect of mergers is to disperse the old stellar population, increasing their radius and decreasing their central density relative to the young population. We argue that dwarf–dwarf mergers offer a plausible scenario for the formation of systems with multiple distinct populations and, more generally, for the origin of age and metallicity gradients in dwarf spheroidals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".