A Tip of the Red Giant Branch Distance of 22.1 ± 1.2 Mpc to the Dark Matter Deficient Galaxy NGC 1052–DF2 from 40 Orbits of Hubble Space Telescope Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The large and diffuse galaxies NGC 1052–DF2 and NGC 1052–DF4 have been found to have very low dark matter content and a population of luminous globular clusters (GCs). Accurate distance measurements are key to interpreting these observations. Recently, the distance to NGC 1052–DF4 was found to be 20.0 ± 1.6 Mpc by identifying the tip of the red giant branch (TRGB) in 12 orbits of Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) imaging. Here we present 40 orbits of HST ACS data for NGC 1052–DF2 and use these data to measure its TRGB. The TRGB is readily apparent in the color–magnitude diagram. Using a forward model that incorporates photometric uncertainties, we find a TRGB magnitude of m F814W,TRGB = 27.67 ± 0.10 mag. The inferred distance is D TRGB = 22.1 ± 1.2 Mpc, consistent with the previous surface brightness fluctuation distances to the bright elliptical galaxy NGC 1052. The new HST distance rules out the idea that some of NGC 1052–DF2's unusual properties can be explained if it were at ∼13 Mpc; instead, it implies that the galaxy’s GCs are even more luminous than had been derived using the previous distance of 20 Mpc. The distance from NGC 1052–DF2 to NGC 1052–DF4 is well-determined at 2.1 ± 0.5 Mpc, significantly larger than the virial diameter of NGC 1052. We discuss the implications for formation scenarios of the galaxies and for the external field effect, which has been invoked to explain the intrinsic dynamics of these objects in the context of modified Newtonian dynamics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".