The Missing Satellites of the Magellanic Clouds? Gaia Proper Motions of the Recently Discovered Ultra-faint Galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract According to LCDM theory, hierarchical evolution occurs on all mass scales, implying that satellites of the Milky Way should also have companions. The recent discovery of ultra-faint dwarf galaxy candidates in close proximity to the Magellanic Clouds provides an opportunity to test this theory. We present proper motion (PM) measurements for 13 of the 32 new dwarf galaxy candidates using Gaia data release 2. All 13 also have radial velocity measurements. We compare the measured 3D velocities of these dwarfs to those expected at the corresponding distance and location for the debris of a Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) analog in a cosmological numerical simulation. We conclude that four of these galaxies (Hor1, Car2, Car3, and Hyi1) have come in with the Magellanic Clouds, constituting the first confirmation of the type of satellite infall predicted by LCDM. Ret2, Tuc2, and Gru1 have velocity components that are not consistent within 3σ of our predictions and are therefore less favorable. Hya2 and Dra2 could be associated with the LMC and merit further attention. We rule out Tuc3, Cra2, Tri2, and Aqu2 as potential members. Of the dwarfs without measured PMs, five of them are deemed unlikely on the basis of their positions and distances alone being too far from the orbital plane expected for LMC debris (Eri2, Ind2, Cet2, Cet3, and Vir1). For the remaining sample, we use the simulation to predict PMs and radial velocities, finding that Phx2 has an overdensity of stars in DR2 consistent with this PM prediction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".