Identification and properties of isolated field elliptical galaxies from CFHTLS-W1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a catalogue of isolated field elliptical (IfE) galaxies drawn from the W1 field of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey (CFHTLS). 228 IfEs were identified from a flux-limited $(r<21.8)$ galaxy catalogue which corresponds to a density of 3 IfE/sq.deg. For comparison we consider a sample of elliptical galaxies living in dense environments, based on identification of the brightest cluster galaxies (BGCs) in the same survey. Using the same dataset for the comparison sample ensures a uniform selection, including in the redshift range as IfEs (i.e. $0.1 ). A comparison of elliptical galaxies in different environments reveals that IfEs and BCGs have similar behaviours in their colours, star formation activities, and scaling relations of mass–size and size–luminosity. IfEs and BCGs have similar slopes in the scaling relations with respect to cluster ellipticals within the $-24 \leq M_{r} \leq -22$ magnitude and $10.2< \textrm{log}(M_{*}/ \textrm M_\odot)\leq12.0$ mass ranges. Three IfEs identified in this study can be associated with fossil groups found in the same survey area which gives clues for future studies.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".