The SAGA Survey. II. Building a Statistical Sample of Satellite Systems around Milky Way–like Galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present the Stage II results from the ongoing Satellites Around Galactic Analogs (SAGA) Survey. Upon completion, the SAGA Survey will spectroscopically identify satellite galaxies brighter than M r , o = −12.3 around 100 Milky Way (MW) analogs at z ∼ 0.01. In Stage II, we have more than quadrupled the sample size of Stage I, delivering results from 127 satellites around 36 MW analogs with an improved target selection strategy and deep photometric imaging catalogs from the Dark Energy Survey and the Legacy Surveys. We have obtained 25,372 galaxy redshifts, peaking around z = 0.2. These data significantly increase spectroscopic coverage for very low redshift objects in 17 < r o < 20.75 around SAGA hosts, creating a unique data set that places the Local Group in a wider context. The number of confirmed satellites per system ranges from zero to nine and correlates with host galaxy and brightest satellite luminosities. We find that the number and luminosities of MW satellites are consistent with being drawn from the same underlying distribution as SAGA systems. The majority of confirmed SAGA satellites are star-forming, and the quenched fraction increases as satellite stellar mass and projected radius from the host galaxy decrease. Overall, the satellite quenched fraction among SAGA systems is lower than that in the Local Group. We compare the luminosity functions and radial distributions of SAGA satellites with theoretical predictions based on cold dark matter simulations and an empirical galaxy–halo connection model and find that the results are broadly in agreement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".