An ALMA survey of the SCUBA-2 Cosmology Legacy Survey UKIDSS/UDS field: high-resolution dust continuum morphologies and the link between sub-millimetre galaxies and spheroid formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present an analysis of the morphology and profiles of the dust continuum emission in 153 bright sub-millimetre galaxies (SMGs) detected with ALMA at signal-to-noise ratios of >8 in high-resolution 0.18 arcsec (∼1 kpc) 870 $\mu$m maps. We measure sizes, shapes, and light profiles for the rest-frame far-infrared emission from these luminous star-forming systems and derive a median effective radius (Re) of 0.10 ± 0.04 arcsec for our sample with a median flux of S870 = 5.6 ± 0.2 mJy. We find that the apparent axial ratio (b/a) distribution of the SMGs peaks at b/a ∼ 0.63 ± 0.02 and is best described by triaxial morphologies, while their emission profiles are best fitted by a Sérsic model with n ≃ 1.0 ± 0.1, similar to exponential discs. This combination of triaxiality and n ∼ 1 Sérsic index are characteristic of bars and we suggest that the bulk of the 870 $\mu$m dust continuum emission in the central ∼2 kpc of these galaxies arises from bar-like structures. As such we caution against using the orientation of shape of the bright dust continuum emission at $\eqsim$ resolution to assess either the orientation of any disc on the sky or tits inclination. By stacking our 870 $\mu$m maps we recover faint extended dust continuum emission on ∼4 kpc scales which contributes 13 ± 1 per cent of the total 870 $\mu$m emission. The scale of this extended emission is similar to that seen for the molecular gas and rest-frame optical light in these systems, suggesting that it represents an extended dust and gas disc at radii larger than the more active bar component. Including this component in our estimated size of the sources we derive a typical effective radius of ≃0.15 ± 0.05 arcsec or 1.2 ± 0.4 kpc. Our results suggest that kpc-scale bars are ubiquitous features of high star-formation rate systems at $z$ ≫ 1, while these systems also contain fainter and more extended gas and stellar envelopes. We suggest that these features, seen some 10–12 Gyr ago, represent the formation phase of the earliest galactic-scale components: stellar bulges.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".