MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2954232684 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa541

Rapid early coeval star formation and assembly of the most-massive galaxies in the Universe

2020· article· en· W2954232684 on OpenAlexafffund
Douglas Rennehan, Arif Babul, Christopher C. Hayward, Connor Bottrell, Maan H Hani, S. C. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie UniversityHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyGalaxyUniverseStar formationGalaxy formation and evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The current consensus on the formation and evolution of the brightest cluster galaxies is that their stellar mass forms early ($z$ ≳ 4) in separate galaxies that then eventually assemble the main structure at late times ($z$ ≲ 1). However, advances in observational techniques have led to the discovery of protoclusters out to $z$ ∼ 7. If these protoclusters assemble rapidly in the early Universe, they should form the brightest cluster galaxies much earlier than suspected by the late-assembly picture. Using a combination of observationally constrained hydrodynamical and dark-matter-only simulations, we show that the stellar assembly time of a sub-set of brightest cluster galaxies occurs at high redshifts ( $z$ > 3) rather than at low redshifts ($z$ < 1), as is commonly thought. We find, using isolated non-cosmological hydrodynamical simulations, that highly overdense protoclusters assemble their stellar mass into brightest cluster galaxies within ∼1 Gyr of evolution – producing massive blue elliptical galaxies at high redshifts ($z$ ≳ 1.5). We argue that there is a downsizing effect on the cluster scale wherein some of the brightest cluster galaxies in the cores of the most-massive clusters assemble earlier than those in lower mass clusters. In those clusters with $z$ = 0 virial mass ≥ 5 × 1014 M⊙, we find that $9.8{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ have their cores assembly early, and a higher fraction of $16.4{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ in those clusters above 1015 M⊙. The James Webb Space Telescope will be able to detect and confirm our prediction in the near future, and we discuss the implications to constraining the value of σ8.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations52
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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