A comparative analysis of the chemical compositions of Gaia-Enceladus/Sausage and Milky Way satellites using APOGEE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We use data from the 17th data release of the Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE 2) to contrast the chemical composition of the recently discovered Gaia Enceladus/Sausage system (GE/S) to those of 10 Milky Way (MW) dwarf satellite galaxies: LMC, SMC, Boötes I, Carina, Draco, Fornax, Sagittarius, Sculptor, Sextans, and Ursa Minor. Our main focus is on the distributions of the stellar populations of those systems in the [Mg/Fe]–[Fe/H] and [Mg/Mn]–[Al/Fe] planes, which are commonly employed in the literature for chemical diagnosis and where dwarf galaxies can be distinguished from in situ populations. We show that, unlike MW satellites, a GE/S sample defined purely on the basis of orbital parameters falls almost entirely within the locus of ‘accreted’ stellar populations in chemical space, which is likely caused by an early quenching of star formation in GE/S. Due to a more protracted history of star formation, stars in the metal-rich end of the MW satellite populations are characterized by lower [Mg/Mn] than those of their GE/S counterparts. The chemical compositions of GE/S stars are consistent with a higher early star formation rate (SFR) than MW satellites of comparable and even higher mass, suggesting that star formation in the early universe was strongly influenced by other parameters in addition to mass. We find that the direction of the metallicity gradient in the [Mg/Mn]–[Al/Fe] plane of dwarf galaxies is an indicator of the early SFR of the system.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".