MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2901284481 · doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3465

<i>HST</i>/WFC3 grism observations of<i><b>z</b></i>∼ 1 clusters: the cluster versus field stellar mass–size relation and evidence for size growth of quiescent galaxies from minor mergers

2018· article· en· W2901284481 on OpenAlexaff
Jasleen Matharu, Adam Muzzin, Gabriel Brammer, R. F. J. van der Burg, Matthew W. Auger, P. C. Hewett, Michael L. Balogh, J. Chan, R. Demarco, Danilo Marchesini, Erica J. Nelson, Allison Noble, Gillian Wilson, H. K. C. Yee

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WaterlooYork University
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGrismGalaxyRedshiftStellar massWide Field Camera 3Cluster (spacecraft)Star formationGalaxy clusterStar clusterHubble space telescope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minor mergers are thought to be responsible for the size growth of quiescent field galaxies with decreasing redshift. We test this hypothesis using the cluster environment as a laboratory. Satellite galaxies in clusters move at high velocities, making mergers between them rare. The stellar mass–size relation in 10 clusters and in the field is measured and compared at |$z$| ∼ 1. Our cluster sample contains 344 spectroscopically confirmed cluster members with Gemini/Gemini Multi-Object Spectrographs and 182 confirmed with Hubble Space Telescope/Wide Field Camera 3 G141 grism spectroscopy. On average, quiescent and star-forming cluster galaxies are smaller than their field counterparts by (0.08 ± 0.04) and (0.07 ± 0.01) dex, respectively. These size offsets are consistent with the average sizes of quiescent and star-forming field galaxies between 1.2 ≤ |$z$| ≤ 1.5, implying the cluster environment has inhibited size growth between this period and |$z$| ∼ 1. The negligible differences measured between the |$z$| ∼ 0 field and cluster quiescent mass–size relations in other works imply that the average size of quiescent cluster galaxies must rise with decreasing redshift. Using a toy model, we show that the disappearance of the compact cluster galaxies might be explained if, on average, |${\sim }40{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$| of them merge with their brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) and |${\sim }60{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$| are tidally destroyed into the intracluster light (ICL) between 0 ≤ |$z$| ≤ 1. This is in agreement with the observed stellar mass growth of BCGs between 0 ≤ |$z$| ≤ 1 and the observed ICL stellar mass fraction at |$z$| ∼ 0. Our results support minor mergers as the cause for the size growth in quiescent field galaxies, with cluster-specific processes responsible for the similarity between the field and cluster quiescent mass–size relations at low 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations59
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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