MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2915692329 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab089c

A MegaCam Survey of Outer Halo Satellites. VII. A Single Sérsic Index versus Effective Radius Relation for Milky Way Outer Halo Satellites*†

2019· article· en· W2915692329 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilky WayHaloSurface brightnessRADIUSLocal GroupDark matter haloGalaxyGlobular cluster

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this work, we use structural properties of the Milky Way’s outer halo (R G > 25 kpc) satellites (dwarf spheroidal galaxies, ultra-faint dwarf (UFD) galaxies and globular clusters (GCs)) derived from deep, wide-field, and homogeneous data to present evidence of a correlation in the Sérsic index versus effective radius plane followed by a large fraction of outer halo GCs and satellite dwarf galaxies. We show that this correlation can be entirely reproduced by fitting empirical relations in the central surface brightness versus absolute magnitude and Sérsic index versus absolute magnitude parameter spaces, and by assuming the existence of two types of outer halo GCs: one of high surface brightness (HSB group), with properties similar to those of inner halo clusters; and another of low surface brightness (LSB group), which share characteristics with dwarf spheroidal and UFD galaxies. Given the similarities of LSB clusters with dwarf spheroidal and UFD galaxies, we discuss the possibility that outer halo clusters also originated inside dark matter halos and that tidal forces from different host galaxy potentials are responsible for the different properties between HSB and LSB clusters.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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