Globular cluster scale sizes in giant galaxies: orbital anisotropy and tidally underfilling clusters in M87, NGC 1399 and NGC 5128
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the shallow increase in globular cluster half-light radii with projected galactocentric distance Rgc observed in the giant galaxies M87, NGC 1399, and NGC 5128. To model the trend in each galaxy, we explore the effects of orbital anisotropy and tidally underfilling clusters. While a strong degeneracy exists between the two parameters, we use kinematic studies to help constrain the distance Rβ beyond which cluster orbits become anisotropic, as well as the distance Rfα beyond which clusters are tidally underfilling. For M87 we find Rβ > 27 kpc and 20 < Rfα < 40 kpc and for NGC 1399 Rβ > 13 kpc and 10 < Rfα < 30 kpc. The connection of Rfα with each galaxy's mass profile indicates the relationship between size and Rgc may be imposed at formation, with only inner clusters being tidally affected. The best-fitting models suggest the dynamical histories of brightest cluster galaxies yield similar present-day distributions of cluster properties. For NGC 5128, the central giant in a small galaxy group, we find Rβ > 5 kpc and Rfα > 30 kpc. While we cannot rule out a dependence on Rgc, NGC 5128 is well fitted by a tidally filling cluster population with an isotropic distribution of orbits, suggesting it may have formed via an initial fast accretion phase. Perturbations from the surrounding environment may also affect a galaxy's orbital anisotropy profile, as outer clusters in M87 and NGC 1399 have primarily radial orbits while outer NGC 5128 clusters remain isotropic.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".