MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3099187547 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab44a0

Preprocessing among the Infalling Galaxy Population of EDisCS Clusters

2019· article· en· W3099187547 on OpenAlexaff
Dennis W. Just, Matthew Kirby, Dennis Zaritsky, Gregory Rudnick, Tyler D. Desjardins, Richard J. Cool, John Moustakas, Douglas Clowe, G. De Lucia, Alfonso Aragón‐Salamanca, Vandana Desai, Rose Finn, Claire Halliday, P. Jablonka, Justin L. Mann, Bianca M. Poggianti, Fuyan Bian, Kelley Liebst

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsVelocity dispersionGalaxyRedshiftGalaxy clusterCluster (spacecraft)PopulationSigmaRADIUSVirial theoremComa ClusterAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present results from a low-resolution spectroscopic survey for 21 galaxy clusters at 0.4 < z < 0.8 selected from the ESO Distant Cluster Survey. We measured spectra using the low-dispersion prism in IMACS on the Magellan Baade telescope and calculate redshifts with an accuracy of σ z = 0.007. We find 1763 galaxies that are brighter than R = 22.9 in the large-scale cluster environs. We identify the galaxies expected to be accreted by the clusters as they evolve to z = 0 using spherical infall models and find that ∼30%–70% of the z = 0 cluster population lies outside the virial radius at z ∼ 0.6. For analogous clusters at z = 0, we calculate that the ratio of galaxies that have fallen into the clusters since z ∼ 0.6 to those that were already in the core at that redshift is typically between ∼0.3 and 1.5. This wide range of ratios is due to intrinsic scatter and is not a function of velocity dispersion, so a variety of infall histories is to be expected for clusters with current velocity dispersions of 300 km s−1 ≲ σ ≲ 1200 km s−1. Within the infall regions of z ∼ 0.6 clusters, we find a larger red fraction of galaxies than in the field and greater clustering among red galaxies than blue. We interpret these findings as evidence of “preprocessing,” where galaxies in denser local environments have their star formation rates affected prior to their aggregation into massive clusters, although the possibility of backsplash galaxies complicates the interpretation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→