The formation of young massive clusters triggered by cloud–cloud collisions in the Antennae galaxies NGC 4038/NGC 4039
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The formation mechanism of super star clusters (SSCs), present-day analogs of the ancient globulars, still remains elusive. The major merger that is the Antennae galaxies is forming SSCs and is one of the primary targets to test the cluster formation mechanism. We reanalyzed the archival ALMA CO data of the Antennae and found three typical observational signatures of a cloud–cloud collision toward SSC B1 and other SSCs in the overlap region: (i) two velocity components with ∼100 km s−1 velocity separation, (ii) bridge features connecting the two components, and (iii) a complementary spatial distribution between them, lending support to collisions of the two components as a cluster formation mechanism. We present a scenario that two clouds with 100 km s−1 velocity separation collided, and SSCs having ∼106–107 M⊙ were formed rapidly during that time scale. We compared the present results with the recent studies of star-forming regions in the Milky Way and the Large Magellanic Cloud, where the SSCs having ∼104–105 M⊙ are located. As a result, we found that there is a positive correlation between the compressed gas pressure generated by collisions and the total stellar mass of an SSC, suggesting that the pressure may be a key parameter in SSC formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".