Extensive Globular Cluster Systems Associated with Ultra Diffuse Galaxies in the Coma Cluster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present Hubble Space Telescope (HST) imaging of two ultra diffuse galaxies (UDGs) with measured stellar velocity dispersions in the Coma cluster. The galaxies, Dragonfly 44 and DFX1, have effective radii of 4.7 kpc and 3.5 kpc and velocity dispersions of 47 − 6 + 8 km s−1 and 30 − 7 + 7 km s−1, respectively. Both galaxies are associated with a striking number of compact objects, tentatively identified as globular clusters: N gc = 74 ± 18 for Dragonfly 44 and N gc = 62 ± 17 for DFX1. The number of globular clusters is much higher than expected from the luminosities of the galaxies but is consistent with expectations from the empirical relation between dynamical mass and globular cluster count defined by other galaxies. Combining our data with previous HST observations of Coma UDGs we find that UDGs have a factor of 6.9 − 2.4 + 1.0 more globular clusters than other galaxies of the same luminosity, in contrast to a recent study of a similar sample by Amorisco et al., but consistent with earlier results for individual galaxies. The Harris et al. relation between globular cluster count and dark matter halo mass implies a median halo mass of M halo ∼ 1.5 × 10 11 M ⊙ for the sixteen Coma UDGs that have been observed with HST so far, with the largest and brightest having M halo ∼ 5 × 10 11 M ⊙ .
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".