The Complete Local-Volume Groups Sample – IV. Star formation and gas content in group-dominant galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Using multiband data, we examine the star formation activity of the nearby group-dominant early-type galaxies of the Complete Local-volume Groups Sample (CLoGS) and the relation between star formation, gas content, and local environment. Only a small fraction of the galaxies (13 per cent; 6/47) are found to be far-ultraviolet (FUV) bright, with FUV to near-infrared colours indicative of recent active star formation (NGC 252, NGC 924, NGC 940, NGC 1106, NGC 7252, and ESO 507-25). These systems are lenticulars presenting the highest FUV-specific star formation rates in the sample (sSFRFUV > 5 × 1013 yr−1), significant cold gas reservoirs [M(H2) = 0.5-61 × 108 M⊙], reside in X-ray faint groups, and none hosts a powerful radio active galactic nucleus (AGN) (P$_{1.4\mathrm{ GHz}}\, \lt 10^{23}$ W Hz−1). The majority of the group-dominant galaxies (87 per cent; 41/47) are FUV faint, with no significant star formation, classified in most cases as spheroids based on their position on the infrared star-forming main sequence (87 per cent; 46/53). Examining the relationships between radio power, SFRFUV, and stellar mass, we find a lack of correlation that suggests a combination of origins for the cool gas in these galaxies, including stellar mass loss, cooling from the intra-group medium (IGrM) or galaxy halo, and acquisition through mergers or tidal interactions. X-ray bright systems, in addition to hosting radio powerful AGN, have a range of SFRs but, with the exception of NGC 315, do not rise to the highest rates seen in the FUV bright systems. We suggest that central group galaxy evolution is linked to gas mass availability, with star formation favoured in the absence of a group-scale X-ray halo, but AGN jet launching is more likely in systems with a cooling IGrM.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".