MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3138998383 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stab751

On the absence of backsplash analogues to NGC 3109 in the ΛCDM framework

2021· article· en· W3138998383 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Indranil Banik, Moritz Haslbauer, Marcel S. Pawlowski, Benoît Famaey, Pavel Kroupa

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeKlaus Tschira StiftungBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungH2020 European Research CouncilProvidence Health CareAgence Nationale de la RechercheDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsDwarf galaxyLocal GroupGalaxyDwarf galaxy problemCold dark matterDark matterAstronomyMilky WayInteracting galaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The dwarf galaxy NGC 3109 is receding 105 km s−1 faster than expected in a Lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM) timing argument analysis of the Local Group and external galaxy groups within 8 Mpc. If this few-body model accurately represents long-range interactions in ΛCDM, this high velocity suggests that NGC 3109 is a backsplash galaxy that was once within the virial radius of the Milky Way and was slingshot out of it. Here, we use the Illustris TNG300 cosmological hydrodynamical simulation and its merger tree to identify backsplash galaxies. We find that backsplashers as massive (≥4.0 × 1010 M⊙) and distant (≥1.2 Mpc) as NGC 3109 are extremely rare, with none having also gained energy during the interaction with their previous host. This is likely due to dynamical friction. Since we identified 13 225 host galaxies similar to the Milky Way or M31, we conclude that postulating NGC 3109 to be a backsplash galaxy causes >3.96σ tension with the expected distribution of backsplashers in ΛCDM. We show that the dark matter only version of TNG300 yields much the same result, demonstrating its robustness to how the baryonic physics is modelled. If instead NGC 3109 is not a backsplasher, consistency with ΛCDM would require the 3D timing argument analysis to be off by 105 km s−1 for this rather isolated dwarf, which we argue is unlikely. We discuss a possible alternative scenario for NGC 3109 and the Local Group satellite planes in the context of MOND, where the Milky Way and M31 had a past close flyby 7–10 Gyr ago.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→