MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2961798372 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab31f3

The Kennicutt–Schmidt Law and Gas Scale Height in Luminous and Ultraluminous Infrared Galaxies

2019· article· en· W2961798372 on OpenAlexaff
C. D. Wilson, Bruce G. Elmegreen, Ashley Bemis, Nathan Brunetti

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyInverseStar formationLuminous infrared galaxyInfraredVelocity dispersionLine (geometry)TurbulenceMillimeterThermodynamicsOpticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new analysis of high-resolution data from the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) for 5 luminous or ultra-luminous infrared galaxies gives a slope for the Kennicutt-Schmidt (KS) relation equal to $1.74^{+0.09}_{\rm -0.07}$ for gas surface densities $\Sigma_{\rm mol}>10^3\;M_\odot$ pc$^{-2}$ and an assumed constant CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor. The velocity dispersion of the CO line, $\sigma_v$, scales approximately as the inverse square root of $\Sigma_{\rm mol}$, making the empirical gas scale height determined from $H\sim0.5\sigma^2/(\pi G\Sigma_{\rm mol})$ nearly constant, 150-190 pc, over 1.5 orders of magnitude in $\Sigma_{\rm mol}$. This constancy of $H$ implies that the average midplane density, which is presumably dominated by CO-emitting gas for these extreme star-forming galaxies, scales linearly with the gas surface density, which, in turn, implies that the gas dynamical rate (the inverse of the free-fall time) varies with $\Sigma_{\rm mol}^{1/2}$, thereby explaining most of the super-linear slope in the KS relation. Consistent with these relations, we also find that the mean efficiency of star formation per free-fall time is roughly constant, 5%-7%, and the gas depletion time decreases at high $\Sigma_{\rm mol}$, reaching only $\sim 16$ Myr at $\Sigma_{\rm mol}\sim10^4\;M_\odot$ pc$^{-2}$. The variation of $\sigma_v$ with $\Sigma_{\rm mol}$ and the constancy of $H$ are in tension with some feedback-driven models, which predict $\sigma_v$ to be more constant and $H$ to be more variable. However, these results are consistent with simulations in which large-scale gravity drives turbulence through a feedback process that maintains an approximately constant Toomre $Q$ instability parameter.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations65
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207