MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of the cluster optical galaxy luminosity function in the CFHTLS: breaking the degeneracy between mass and redshift

2018· article· en· W3105706609 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Florian Sarron, N. Martinet, F. Durret, C. Adami

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre National d’Etudes Spatiales
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyGalaxy clusterLuminosity functionCluster (spacecraft)CosmologyLuminosityAstronomyPopulationRedshift surveyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obtaining large samples of galaxy clusters is important for cosmology: cluster counts as a function of redshift and mass can constrain the parameters of our Universe. They are also useful in order to understand the formation and evolution of clusters. We develop an improved version of the Adami & MAzure Cluster FInder (AMACFI), now the Adami, MAzure & Sarron Cluster FInder (AMASCFI), and apply it to the 154 deg2 of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey (CFHTLS) to obtain a large catalogue of 1371 cluster candidates with mass M200 > 1014 M⊙ and redshift z ≤ 0.7. We derive the selection function of the algorithm from the Millennium simulation, and cluster masses from a richness–mass scaling relation built from matching our candidates with X-ray detections. We study the evolution of these clusters with mass and redshift by computing the i′-band galaxy luminosity functions (GLFs) for the early-type (ETGs) and late-type galaxies (LTGs). This sample is 90% pure and 70% complete, and therefore our results are representative of a large fraction of the cluster population in these redshift and mass ranges. We find an increase in both the ETG and LTG faint populations with decreasing redshift (with Schechter slopes αETG = −0.65 ± 0.03 and αLTG = −0.95 ± 0.04 at z = 0.6, and αETG = −0.79 ± 0.02 and αLTG = −1.26 ± 0.03 at z = 0.2) and also a decrease in the LTG (but not the ETG) bright end. Our large sample allows us to break the degeneracy between mass and redshift, finding that the redshift evolution is more pronounced in high-mass clusters, but that there is no significant dependence of the faint end on mass for a given redshift. These results show that the cluster red sequence is mainly formed at redshift z > 0.7, and that faint ETGs continue to enrich the red sequence through quenching of brighter LTGs at z ≤ 0.7. The efficiency of this quenching is higher in large-mass clusters, while the accretion rate of faint LTGs is lower as the more massive clusters have already emptied most of their environment at higher redshifts.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207