Fluctuations in galactic bar parameters due to bar–spiral interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We study the late-time evolution of the central regions of two Milky Way (MW)-like simulations of galaxies formed in a cosmological context, one hosting a fast bar and the other a slow one. We find that bar length, Rb, measurements fluctuate on a dynamical time-scale by up to 100 per cent, depending on the spiral structure strength and measurement threshold. The bar amplitude oscillates by about 15 per cent, correlating with Rb. The Tremaine–Weinberg method estimates of the bars’ instantaneous pattern speeds show variations around the mean of up to $\sim \!20{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$, typically anticorrelating with the bar length and strength. Through power spectrum analyses, we establish that these bar pulsations, with a period in the range ∼60–200 Myr, result from its interaction with multiple spiral modes, which are coupled with the bar. Because of the presence of odd spiral modes, the two bar halves typically do not connect at exactly the same time to a spiral arm, and their individual lengths can be significantly offset. We estimated that in about 50 per cent of bar measurements in MW-mass external galaxies, the bar lengths of SBab-type galaxies are overestimated by $\sim \!15{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ and those of SBbc types by $\sim \!55{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$. Consequently, bars longer than their corotation radius reported in the literature, dubbed ‘ultrafast bars’, may simply correspond to the largest biases. Given that the Scutum–Centaurus arm is likely connected to the near half of the MW bar, recent direct measurements may be overestimating its length by 1–1.5 kpc, while its present pattern speed may be 5–10 $\rm km\ s^{-1}\ kpc^{-1}$ smaller than its time-averaged value.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".