Quiescent Galaxy Size, Velocity Dispersion, and Dynamical Mass Evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We use surveys covering the redshift range 0.05 < z < 3.8 to explore quiescent galaxy scaling relations and the redshift evolution of the velocity dispersion, size, and dynamical mass at fixed stellar mass. For redshift z < 0.6, we derive mass-limited samples and demonstrate that these large samples enhance constraints on the evolution of the quiescent population. The constraints include 2985 new velocity dispersions from the SHELS F2 survey. In contrast with the known substantial evolution of size with redshift, evolution in the velocity dispersion is negligible. The dynamical-to-stellar-mass ratio increases significantly as the universe ages, in agreement with recent results that combine high-redshift data with the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Like other investigators, we interpret this result as an indication that the dark matter fraction within the effective radius increases as a result of the impact of the minor mergers that are responsible for size growth. We emphasize that dense redshift surveys covering the range 0.07 < z < 1 along with strong and weak lensing measurements could remove many ambiguities in evolutionary studies of the quiescent population.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".