MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2885408465 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf808

HST F160W Imaging of Very Massive Galaxies at 1.5 < z < 3.0: Diversity of Structures and the Effect of Close Pairs on Number Density Estimates

2019· article· en· W2885408465 on OpenAlexafffund
Z. Cemile Marsan, Danilo Marchesini, Adam Muzzin, Gabriel Brammer, Rachel Bezanson, Marijn Franx, Ivo Labbé, Britt Lundgren, Gregory Rudnick, Mauro Stefanon, Pieter van Dokkum, David A. Wake, Katherine E. Whitaker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Research FoundationDanmarks GrundforskningsfondSpace Telescope Science InstituteYork UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsGalaxyAstrophysicsRadio galaxyAstronomyActive galactic nucleusDiversity (politics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a targeted follow-up Hubble Space Telescope WFC3 F160W imaging study of very massive galaxies ( ) selected from a combination of ground-based near-infrared galaxy surveys (UltraVISTA, NEWFIRM Medium Band Survey-II , UKIRT Infrared Deep Sky Survey (UKIDSS) Ultra-Deep Survey (UDS) at 1.5 < z < 3). We find that these galaxies are diverse in their structures, with ∼1/3 of the targets being composed of close pairs, and span a wide range in sizes. At 1.5 < z < 2.5, the sizes of both star-forming and quiescent galaxies are consistent with the extrapolation of the stellar mass–size relations determined at lower stellar masses. At 2.5 < z < 3.0, however, we find evidence that quiescent galaxies are systematically larger than expected based on the extrapolation of the relation derived using lower stellar mass galaxies. We used the observed light profiles of the blended systems to decompose their stellar masses and investigate the effect of the close pairs on the measured number densities of very massive galaxies in the early universe. We estimate correction factors to account for close-pair blends and apply them to the observed stellar mass functions (SMFs) measured using ground-based surveys. Given the large uncertainties associated with this extreme population of galaxies, there is currently little tension between the (blending-corrected) number density estimates and predictions from theoretical models. Although we currently lack the statistics to robustly correct for close-pair blends, we show that this is a systematic effect that can reduce the observed number density of very massive galaxies by up to a factor of ∼1.5, and should be accounted for in future studies of SMFs.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→