Multiple AGN activity during the BCG assembly of XDCPJ0044.0-2033 at z ∼ 1.6
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Undisturbed galaxy clusters are characterized by a massive and large elliptical galaxy at their centre, i.e. the brightest cluster galaxy (BCG). How these central galaxies form is still debated. According to most models, a typical epoch for their assembly is $z$ ∼ 1–2. We have performed a detailed multiwavelength analysis of the core of XMM–Newton Distant Cluster Project (XDCP) J0044.0-2033 (XDCP0044), one of the most massive and densest galaxy clusters currently known at redshift $z$ ∼ 1.6, whose central galaxy population shows high star formation compared to lower z clusters and an X-ray active galactic nuclei (AGN) located close to its centre. SINFONI J-, H-, and KMOS YJ-, H-bands spectroscopic data have been analysed, together with deep archival HST photometric data in F105W, F140W, and F160W bands, Chandra X-ray, radio JVLA data at 1–2 GHz, and ALMA band-6 observations. In the very central region of the cluster (∼70 kpc × 70 kpc), two systems of interacting galaxies have been identified and studied (Complex A and B), with a total of seven confirmed cluster members. These galaxies show perturbed morphologies and three of them show signs of AGN activity. In particular, two type-1 AGN with typical broad lines have been found at the centre of each complex (both of them X-ray obscured and highly accreting with $\rm \lambda _{Edd}\sim 0.4-0.6$), while a type-2 AGN has been discovered in Complex A. The AGN at the centre of Complex B is also detected in X-ray, while the other two are spatially related to radio emission. The three AGN provide one of the closest AGN triple at $z$ > 1 revealed so far with a minimum (maximum) projected distance of 10 (40) kpc. The observation of high star formation, merger signatures, and nuclear activity in the core of XDCP0044 suggests that all these processes are key ingredients in shaping the nascent BCG. According to our data, XDCP0044 could form a typical massive galaxy of $M_{\star }\sim 10^{12} \, \mathrm{M}_{\odot }$, hosting a black hole of $\rm 2 \times 10^8\!-\!10^9 \, \mathrm{M}_{\odot }$, in a time-scale of the order of ∼2.5 Gyr.
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".