CO excitation and line energy distributions in gas-selected galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT While emission-selected galaxy surveys are biased towards the most luminous part of the galaxy population, absorption selection is a potentially unbiased galaxy selection technique with respect to luminosity. However, the physical properties of absorption-selected galaxies are not well characterized. Here, we study the excitation conditions in the interstellar medium (ISM) in damped Ly α (DLA) absorption-selected galaxies. We present a study of the CO spectral-line energy distribution (SLED) in four high-metallicity absorption-selected galaxies with previously reported CO detections at intermediate (z ∼ 0.7) and high (z ∼ 2) redshifts. We find further evidence for a wide variety of ISM conditions in these galaxies. Two out of the four galaxies show CO SLEDs consistent with that of the Milky Way inner disc. Interestingly, one of these galaxies is at z ∼ 2 and has a CO SLED below that of main-sequence galaxies at similar redshifts. The other two galaxies at z > 2 show more excited ISM conditions, with one of them showing thermal excitation of the mid-J (J = 3, 4) levels, similar to that seen in two massive main-sequence galaxies at these redshifts. Overall, we find that absorption selection traces a diverse population of galaxies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".