MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2784281981 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731988

KMOS LENsing Survey (KLENS): Morpho-kinematic analysis of star-forming galaxies at z ~ 2

2018· article· en· W2784281981 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California ObservatoriesFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesUniversidad Complutense de MadridSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsVelocity dispersionGalaxyRedshiftStellar massStar formationInitial mass functionRedshift surveyGravitational lens

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results from the KMOS LENsing Survey (KLENS), which is exploiting gravitational lensing to study the kinematics of 24 star-forming galaxies at 1.4 < z < 3.5 with a median mass of log(M⋆∕M⊙) = 9.6 and a median star formation rate (SFR) of 7.5 M⊙ yr−1. We find that 25% of these low mass/low SFR galaxies are rotation-dominated, while the majority of our sample shows no velocity gradient. When combining our data with other surveys, we find that the fraction of rotation-dominated galaxies increases with the stellar mass, and decreases for galaxies with a positive offset from the main sequence (higher specific star formation rate). We also investigate the evolution of the intrinsic velocity dispersion, σ0, as a function of the redshift, z, and stellar mass, M⋆, assuming galaxies in quasi-equilibrium (Toomre Q parameter equal to 1). From the z − σ0 relation, we find that the redshift evolution of the velocity dispersion is mostly expected for massive galaxies (log(M⋆∕M⊙) > 10). We derive a M⋆ − σ0 relation, using the Tully–Fisher relation, which highlights that a different evolution of the velocity dispersion is expected depending on the stellar mass, with lower velocity dispersions for lower masses, and an increase for higher masses, stronger at higher redshift. The observed velocity dispersions from this work and from comparison samples spanning 0 < z < 3.5 appear to follow this relation, except at higher redshift (z > 2), where we observe higher velocity dispersions for low masses (log(M⋆∕M⊙) ~ 9.6) and lower velocity dispersions for high masses (log(M⋆∕M⊙) ~ 10.9) than expected. This discrepancy could, for instance, suggest that galaxies at high redshift do not satisfy the stability criterion, or that the adopted parametrization of the specific star formation rate and molecular properties fail at high redshift.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→