Stellar systems in the direction of the Hickson Compact Group 44 : I. Low surface brightness galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context. In spite of the numerous studies of low-luminosity galaxies in different environments, there is still no consensus about their formation scenario. In particular, a large number of galaxies displaying extremely low-surface brightnesses have been detected in the last year, and the nature of these objects is under discussion. Aims. In this paper we report the detection of two extended low-surface brightness (LSB) objects (μeffg′ ≃ 27 mag) found, in projection, next to NGC 3193 and in the zone of the Hickson Compact Group (HCG) 44, respectively. Methods. We analyzed deep, high-quality, GEMINI-GMOS images with ELLIPSE within IRAF in order to obtain their brightness profiles and structural parameters. We also searched for the presence of globular clusters (GC) in these fields. Results. We have found that, if these LSB galaxies were at the distances of NGC 3193 and HCG 44, they would show sizes and luminosities similar to those of the ultra-diffuse galaxies (UDGs) found in the Coma cluster and other associations. In that case, their sizes would be rather larger than those displayed by the Local Group dwarf spheroidal (dSph) galaxies. We have detected a few unresolved sources in the sky zone occupied by these galaxies showing colors and brightnesses typical of blue globular clusters. Conclusions. From the comparison of the properties of the galaxies presented in this work with those of similar objects reported in the literature, we have found that LSB galaxies display sizes covering a quite extended continous range (reff ~ 0.3−4.5 kpc), in contrast to “normal” early-type galaxies, which show reff ~ 1.0 kpc with a low dispersion. This fact might point to different formation processes for both types 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".