MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2942147002 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1169

LARgE Survey – I. Dead monsters: the massive end of the passive galaxy stellar mass function at cosmic noon

2019· article· en· W2942147002 on OpenAlexafffund
Liz Arcila-Osejo, Marcin Sawicki, S. Arnouts, Anneya Golob, T. Moutard, Robert Sorba

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversitySaint Mary's University
FundersInstitut national des sciences de l'UniversNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Hawai'i
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyStellar massRedshiftAstronomyStar formationGalaxy formation and evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce the largest to date survey of massive quiescent galaxies at redshift z ∼ 1.6. With these data, which cover 27.6 deg2, we can find significant numbers of very rare objects such as ultra-massive quiescent galaxies that populate the extreme massive end of the galaxy mass function, or dense environments that are likely to become present-day massive galaxy clusters. In this paper, the first in a series, we apply our gzKs adaptation of the BzK technique to select our z ∼ 1.6 galaxy catalogue and then study the quiescent galaxy stellar mass function with good statistics over M⋆ ∼ 1010.2–1011.7 M⊙ – a factor of 30 in mass – including 60 ultra-massive z ∼ 1.6 quiescent galaxies with M⋆ > 1011.5 M⊙. We find that the stellar mass function of quiescent galaxies at z ∼ 1.6 is well represented by the Schechter function over this large mass range. This suggests that the mass-quenching mechanism observed at lower redshifts must have already been well established by this epoch, and that it is likely due to a single physical mechanism over a wide range of mass. This close adherence to the Schechter shape also suggests that neither merging nor gravitational lensing significantly affects the observed quenched population. Finally, comparing measurements of |$M^\ast$| parameters for quiescent and star-forming populations (ours and from the literature), we find hints of an offset (⁠|$M^\ast _{\mathrm{ SF}}\gt M^\ast _{\mathrm{ PE}}$|⁠), which could suggest that the efficiency of the quenching process evolves with time.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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