MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529217009 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/833/2/167

THE PAndAS VIEW OF THE ANDROMEDA SATELLITE SYSTEM. II. DETAILED PROPERTIES OF 23 M31 DWARF SPHEROIDAL GALAXIES

2016· article· en· W2529217009 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersScience and Technology Facilities Council
KeywordsDwarf spheroidal galaxyDwarf galaxyDwarf galaxy problemAndromedaGalaxyLuminositySatellite galaxyElliptical galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We present a comprehensive analysis of the structural properties and luminosities of the 23 dwarf spheroidal galaxies that fall within the footprint of the Pan-Andromeda Archaeological Survey (PAndAS). These dwarf galaxies represent the large majority of Andromeda’s known satellite dwarf galaxies and cover a wide range in luminosity ( or ) and surface brightness ( mag arcsec −2 ). We confirm most previous measurements, but we find And XIX to be significantly larger than before ( , ) and cannot derive parameters for And XXVII as it is likely not a bound stellar system. We also significantly revise downward the luminosities of And XV and And XVI, which are now or . Finally, we provide the first detailed analysis of Cas II/And XXX, a fairly faint system ( ) of typical size ( ), located in close proximity to the two bright elliptical dwarf galaxies NGC 147 and NGC 185. Combined with the set of homogeneous distances published in an earlier contribution, our analysis dutifully tracks all relevant sources of uncertainty in the determination of the properties of the dwarf galaxies from the PAndAS photometric catalog. We further publish the posterior probability distribution functions of all the parameters we fit for in the form of MCMC chains available online; these inputs should be used in any analysis that aims to remain truthful to the data and properly account for covariance between parameters.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations155
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207