MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750982206 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8a78

Virgo Redux: The Masses and Stellar Content of Nuclei in Early-type Galaxies from Multiband Photometry and Spectroscopy

2017· article· en· W2750982206 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstronomy and Astrophysical Research
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirgo ClusterGalaxyPhotometry (optics)Stellar populationSpectroscopyGalaxy clusterCluster (spacecraft)PopulationStellar mass

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present an analysis of 39 nuclei and their early-type hosts in the Virgo Cluster using 10 broadband filters: F300W, F475W, F850LP, F160W, <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>u</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mtext mathvariant="italic"/> <mml:mi mathvariant="italic">griz</mml:mi> </mml:math> , and K s . We describe the Virgo Redux program, which provides high-resolution UV and NIR imaging. Combining this data with optical and NIR imaging from the ACS Virgo Cluster Survey and the Next Generation Virgo Cluster Survey, we estimate masses, metallicities, and ages using simple stellar population (SSP) models. For 19 nuclei, we compare to SSP parameters derived from Keck and Gemini spectra and find reasonable agreement between the photometric and spectroscopic metallicity: the rms scatter is 0.3 dex. We reproduce the nucleus–galaxy mass fraction of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:msubsup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>0.33</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>−</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.07</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.09</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msubsup> </mml:math> % for galaxy stellar masses <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>8.4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mo>–</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>10.3</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mspace width="0.25em"/> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>M</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>⊙</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> with a typical precision of ∼35% for the nuclei masses. Based on available model predictions, there is no single preferred formation scenario for nuclei, suggesting that nuclei are formed stochastically through a mix of processes. Nuclei metallicities are statistically identical to those of their hosts, appearing 0.07 ± 0.3 dex more metal-rich on average; however, omitting galaxies with unusual origins, nuclei are 0.20 ± 0.28 dex more metal-rich. Nuclei appear to be 0.56 ± 0.12 dex more metal-rich than ultracompact dwarf galaxies (UCDs) at fixed mass. We find no clear age difference between nuclei and their galaxies, with nuclei displaying a broad range of ages. Interestingly, we find that the most massive nuclei may be flatter and more closely aligned with the semimajor axes of their hosts, suggesting that they formed through predominantly dissipative processes.

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 score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations58
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchFrench-language works237,207