Tidal Distortions in NGC1052-DF2 and NGC1052-DF4: Independent Evidence for a Lack of Dark Matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two ultra-diffuse galaxies in the same group, NGC1052-DF2 and NGC1052-DF4, have been found to have little or no dark matter and to host unusually luminous globular cluster populations. Such low-mass diffuse objects in a group environment are easily disrupted and are expected to show evidence of tidal distortions. In this work, we present deep new imaging of the NGC1052 group, obtained with the Dragonfly Telephoto Array, to test this hypothesis. We find that both galaxies show strong position-angle twists and are significantly more elongated at their outskirts than in their interiors. The group’s central massive elliptical NGC1052 is the most likely source of these tidal disturbances. The observed distortions imply that the galaxies have a low total mass or are very close to NGC1052. Considering constraints on the galaxies’ relative distances, we infer that the dark matter halo masses of these galaxies cannot be much greater than their stellar masses. Calculating pericenters from the distortions, we find that the galaxies are on highly elliptical orbits, with a ratio of pericenter to present-day radius R peri/R 0 ∼ 0.1 if the galaxies are dark matter–free and R peri/R 0 ∼ 0.01 if they have a normal dark halo. Our findings provide strong evidence, independent of kinematic constraints, that both galaxies are dark matter–deficient. Furthermore, the similarity of the tidal features in NGC1052-DF2 and NGC1052-DF4 strongly suggests that they arose at comparable distances from NGC1052. In Appendix A, we describe sbcontrast, a robust method for determining the surface brightness limits of images.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".