Giant molecular cloud catalogues for PHANGS-ALMA: methods and initial results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We present improved methods for segmenting CO emission from galaxies into individual molecular clouds, providing an update to the cprops algorithms presented by Rosolowsky & Leroy. The new code enables both homogenization of the noise and spatial resolution among data, which allows for rigorous comparative analysis. The code also models the completeness of the data via false source injection and includes an updated segmentation approach to better deal with blended emission. These improved algorithms are implemented in a publicly available Python package, pycprops. We apply these methods to 10 of the nearest galaxies in the PHANGS-ALMA survey, cataloguing CO emission at a common 90 pc resolution and a matched noise level. We measure the properties of 4986 individual clouds identified in these targets. We investigate the scaling relations among cloud properties and the cloud mass distributions in each galaxy. The physical properties of clouds vary among galaxies, both as a function of galactocentric radius and as a function of dynamical environment. Overall, the clouds in our target galaxies are well-described by approximate energy equipartition, although clouds in stellar bars and galaxy centres show elevated line widths and virial parameters. The mass distribution of clouds in spiral arms has a typical mass scale that is 2.5× larger than interarm clouds and spiral arms clouds show slightly lower median virial parameters compared to interarm clouds (1.2 versus 1.4).
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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".