MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2908897897 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf50a

High-redshift Massive Quiescent Galaxies Are as Flat as Star-forming Galaxies: The Flattening of Galaxies and the Correlation with Structural Properties in CANDELS/3D-HST

2019· article· en· W2908897897 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlatteningGalaxyElliptical galaxyPeculiar galaxyLuminous infrared galaxyLenticular galaxyRadio galaxyGalaxy formation and evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the median flattening of galaxies at 0.2 < z < 4.0 in all five CANDELS/3D-HST fields via the apparent axis ratio, q. We separate the sample into bins of the redshift, stellar mass, Sérsic index, size, and UVJ-determined star-forming state to discover the most important drivers of the median q (q med). Quiescent galaxies at z < 1 and M * > 1011 M ⊙ are rounder than those at lower masses, consistent with the hypothesis that they have grown significantly through dry merging. The massive quiescent galaxies at higher redshifts become flatter and are as flat as star-forming massive galaxies at 2.5 < z < 3.5, consistent with formation through direct transformations or wet mergers. We find that in quiescent galaxies, correlations with q med and M *, and z and r e are driven by the evolution in the Sérsic index (n), consistent with the growing accumulation of minor mergers at lower redshifts. Interestingly, n does not drive these trends fully in star-forming galaxies. Instead, the strongest predictor of q in star-forming galaxies is the effective radius, where larger galaxies are flatter. Our findings suggest that q med is the tracing bulge-to-total ratio, which would explain why smaller/more massive star-forming galaxies are rounder than their extended/less massive analogs, although it is unclear why the Sérsic index correlates more weakly with flattening for star-forming galaxies than for quiescent galaxies.

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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