MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922188800 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab095b

Inferred Evidence for Dark Matter Kinematic Substructure with SDSS–Gaia

2019· article· en· W2922188800 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lina Necib, Mariangela Lisanti, Vasily Belokurov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryYork UniversityScience and Technology Facilities CouncilCarnegie Mellon UniversityOffice of ScienceJohns Hopkins UniversityCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityHarvard UniversityOhio State UniversityNew Mexico State UniversityUniversity of PortsmouthYale UniversityVanderbilt UniversityEuropean Space AgencyNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonFlatiron HealthAlfred P. Sloan FoundationPrinceton UniversityBrookhaven National LaboratoryEuropean CommissionU.S. Department of EnergyResearch Corporation for Science Advancement
KeywordsPhysicsHaloDark matterAstrophysicsSubstructureDark matter haloAstronomyGalactic haloPopulationMilky WayStarsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We use the distribution of accreted stars in Sloan Digital Sky Survey–Gaia DR2 to demonstrate that a nontrivial fraction of the dark matter halo within galactocentric radii of 7.5–10 kpc and is in substructure and thus may not be in equilibrium. Using a mixture likelihood analysis, we separate the contributions of an old, isotropic stellar halo and a younger anisotropic population. The latter dominates and is uniform within the region studied. It can be explained as the tidal debris of a disrupted massive satellite on a highly radial orbit and is consistent with mounting evidence from recent studies. Simulations that track the tidal debris from such mergers find that the dark matter traces the kinematics of its stellar counterpart. If so, our results indicate that a component of the nearby dark matter halo that is sourced by luminous satellites is in kinematic substructure referred to as debris flow. These results challenge the Standard Halo Model, which is discrepant with the distribution recovered from the stellar data, and have important ramifications for the interpretation of direct detection experiments.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations109
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207