MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Star formation scaling relations at ∼100 pc from PHANGS: Impact of completeness and spatial scale

2021· article· en· W3155342736 on OpenAlexaff
Ismael Pessa, Eva Schinnerer, Francesco Belfiore, Éric Emsellem, Adam K. Leroy, Andreas Schruba, J. M. Diederik Kruijssen, Hsi-An Pan, Guillermo A. Blanc, P. Sánchez–Blázquez, Frank Bigiel, Mélanie Chevance, Enrico Congiu, Daniel A. Dale, Christopher M. Faesi, Simon C. O. Glover, Kathryn Grasha, Brent Groves, I-Ting Ho, María J. Jiménez-Donaire, Ralf S. Klessen, Kathryn Kreckel, Eric W. Koch, Daizhong Liu, Sharon E. Meidt, J. Pety, Miguel Querejeta, Erik Rosolowsky, Toshiki Saito, Francesco Santoro, Jiayi Sun, A. Usero, Elizabeth J. Watkins, Thomas G. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanEuropean CommissionDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónNational Institutes of Natural SciencesAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y UniversidadesNational Radio Astronomy ObservatoryKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCompleteness (order theory)ScalingScale (ratio)Star (game theory)Star formationPhysicsAstrophysicsMathematicsGeographyCartographyGeometryStarsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims. The complexity of star formation at the physical scale of molecular clouds is not yet fully understood. We investigate the mechanisms regulating the formation of stars in different environments within nearby star-forming galaxies from the Physics at High Angular resolution in Nearby GalaxieS (PHANGS) sample. Methods. Integral field spectroscopic data and radio-interferometric observations of 18 galaxies were combined to explore the existence of the resolved star formation main sequence (Σstellar versus ΣSFR), resolved Kennicutt–Schmidt relation (Σmol. gas versus ΣSFR), and resolved molecular gas main sequence (Σstellar versus Σmol. gas), and we derived their slope and scatter at spatial resolutions from 100 pc to 1 kpc (under various assumptions). Results. All three relations were recovered at the highest spatial resolution (100 pc). Furthermore, significant variations in these scaling relations were observed across different galactic environments. The exclusion of non-detections has a systematic impact on the inferred slope as a function of the spatial scale. Finally, the scatter of the Σmol. gas + stellar versus ΣSFR correlation is smaller than that of the resolved star formation main sequence, but higher than that found for the resolved Kennicutt–Schmidt relation. Conclusions. The resolved molecular gas main sequence has the tightest relation at a spatial scale of 100 pc (scatter of 0.34 dex), followed by the resolved Kennicutt–Schmidt relation (0.41 dex) and then the resolved star formation main sequence (0.51 dex). This is consistent with expectations from the timescales involved in the evolutionary cycle of molecular clouds. Surprisingly, the resolved Kennicutt–Schmidt relation shows the least variation across galaxies and environments, suggesting a tight link between molecular gas and subsequent star formation. The scatter of the three relations decreases at lower spatial resolutions, with the resolved Kennicutt–Schmidt relation being the tightest (0.27 dex) at a spatial scale of 1 kpc. Variation in the slope of the resolved star formation main sequence among galaxies is partially due to different detection fractions of ΣSFR with respect to Σstellar.

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)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations76
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207