MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2797190377 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1563

NIHAO XVI: the properties and evolution of kinematically selected discs, bulges, and stellar haloes

2019· article· en· W2797190377 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Aura Obreja, Aaron A. Dutton, Andrea V. Macciò, Benjamin P. Moster, Tobias Buck, Glenn van de Ven, Liang Wang, Gregory S. Stinson, Zhu Ling

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020European Research CouncilNew York University Abu DhabiMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieEuropean CommissionDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftYork University
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsHaloGalaxyBulgeDark matterDark matter haloStellar massAngular momentumBaryonRedshiftStar formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use 25 simulated galaxies from the NIHAO project to define and characterize a variety of kinematic stellar structures: Thin and thick discs, large-scale single discs, classical and pseudobulges, spheroids, inner discs, and stellar haloes. These structures have masses, spins, shapes, and rotational support in good agreement with theoretical expectations and observational data. Above a dark matter halo mass of 2.5 × 1011Mθ, all galaxies have a classical bulge and 70 per cent have a thin and thick disc. The kinematic (thin) discs follow a power-law relation between angular momentum and stellarmass J= 3.4M1.26±0.06, in very good agreement with the prediction based on the empirical stellar-to-halo-mass relation in the same mass range, and show a strong correlation between maximum 'observed' rotation velocity and dark matter halo circular velocity vc = 6.4v0.64±0.04 max . Tracing back in time these structures' progenitors, we find all of them to lose a fraction 1 - fj of their maximum angular momentum. Thin discs are significantly better at retaining their high-redshift spins (fj ∼ 0.70) than thick ones (fj ∼ 0.40). Stellar haloes have their progenitor baryons assembled the latest (z1/2 ∼ 1.1) and over the longest time-scales (τ ∼ 6.2Gyr), and have the smallest fraction of stars born in situ (fin situ = 0.35 ± 0.14). All other structures have 1.5 ≲ z1/2 ≲ 3, τ = 4 ± 2Gyr, and fin situ ≳ 0.9.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→