MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982266898 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab5b9f

An Extremely Massive Quiescent Galaxy at z = 3.493: Evidence of Insufficiently Rapid Quenching Mechanisms in Theoretical Models*

2020· article· en· W2982266898 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Forrest, Marianna Annunziatella, Gillian Wilson, Danilo Marchesini, Adam Muzzin, Michael C. Cooper, Z. Cemile Marsan, Ian McConachie, J. Chan, Percy Gómez, Erin Kado-Fong, F. La Barbera, Ivo Labbé, Daniel Lange-Vagle, Julie Nantais, M. Nonino, Theodore Peña, P. Saracco, Mauro Stefanon, R. F. J. van der Burg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuenching (fluorescence)GalaxyPhysicsAstrophysicsAstronomyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present spectra of the most massive quiescent galaxy yet spectroscopically confirmed at z > 3, verified via the detection of Balmer absorption features in the H - and K -bands of Keck/MOSFIRE. The spectra confirm a galaxy with no significant ongoing star formation, consistent with the lack of rest-frame UV flux and overall photometric spectral energy distribution. With a stellar mass of at z = 3.493, this galaxy is nearly three times more massive than the highest redshift spectroscopically confirmed absorption-line-identified galaxy known. The star formation history of this quiescent galaxy implies that it formed >1000 M ⊙ yr −1 for almost 0.5 Gyr beginning at z ∼ 7.2, strongly suggestive that it is the descendant of massive dusty star-forming galaxies at 5 < z < 7 recently observed with ALMA. While galaxies with similarly extreme stellar masses are reproduced in some simulations at early times, such a lack of ongoing star formation is not seen there. This suggests the need for a quenching process that either starts earlier or is more rapid than that currently prescribed, challenging our current understanding of how ultra-massive galaxies form and evolve in the early universe.

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 score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.763

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations101
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207