MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3169811235 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac088b

Inferring the Morphology of Stellar Distribution in TNG50: Twisted and Twisted-stretched Shapes

2021· article· en· W3169811235 on OpenAlexaff
Razieh Emami, Lars Hernquist, Charles Alcock, Shy Genel, Sownak Bose, Rainer Weinberger, Mark Vogelsberger, Xuejian Shen, Joshua S. Speagle, Federico Marinacci, John C. Forbes, Paul Torrey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHarvard University
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsHaloMilky WayStarsGalaxyDark matterOrientation (vector space)Angular momentumDistribution (mathematics)GeometryClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the morphology of the stellar distribution (SD) in a sample of Milky Way–like galaxies in the TNG50 simulation. Using a local in shell iterative method as the main approach, we explicitly show evidence of twisting (in about 52% of halos) and stretching (in 48% of them) in real space. This is matched with the reorientation observed in the eigenvectors of the inertia tensor and gives us a clear picture of having a reoriented SD. We make a comparison between the shape profile of the dark matter (DM) halo and SD and quite remarkably see that their radial profiles are fairly close, especially at small galactocentric radii, where the stellar disk is located. This implies that the DM halo is somewhat aligned with stars in response to the baryonic potential. The level of alignment mostly decreases away from the center. We study the impact of substructures in the orbital circularity parameter. It is demonstrated that in some cases, faraway substructures are counterrotating compared with the central stars and may flip the sign of total angular momentum and thus the orbital circularity parameter. Truncating them above 150 kpc, however, retains the disky structure of the galaxy as per initial selection. Including the impact of substructures in the shape of stars, we explicitly show that their contribution is subdominant. Overlaying our theoretical results on the observational constraints from previous literature, we establish fair agreement.

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: Simulation or modeling
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)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→