MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221164462 · doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slac075

The early Universe was dust-rich and extremely hot

2022· article· en· W4221164462 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Viero, Dongwoo T. Chung, Lorenzo Moncelsi

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftGalaxyUniverseCosmic dustStarsStar formationPopulationAstronomyCircumstellar dustLuminosityExtinction (optical mineralogy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We investigate the dust properties and star-formation signature of galaxies in the early Universe by stacking 111 227 objects in the recently released COSMOS catalogue on maps at wavelengths bracketing the peak of warmed dust emission. We find an elevated far-infrared luminosity density to redshift 8, indicating abundant dust in the early Universe. We further find an increase of dust temperature with redshift, reaching $100\pm 12\,\mathrm{ K}$ at $\mathit{z}$ ∼ 7, suggesting either the presence of silicate rich dust originating from Population ii stars, or sources of heating beyond simply young hot stars. Lastly, we try to understand how these objects have been missed in previous surveys, and how to design observations to target them. All code, links to the data, and instructions to reproduce this research in full are located at https://github.com/marcoviero/simstack3/.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society LettersSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207