MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321116320 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acaf85

PHANGS–JWST First Results: Mid-infrared Emission Traces Both Gas Column Density and Heating at 100 pc Scales

2023· article· en· W4321116320 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam K. Leroy, Karin Sandström, Erik Rosolowsky, Francesco Belfiore, Alberto D. Bolatto, Yixian Cao, Eric W. Koch, Eva Schinnerer, Ashley T. Barnes, Frank Bigiel, Guillermo A. Blanc, Jérémy Chastenet, Ness Mayker Chen, Mélanie Chevance, Ryan Chown, Enrico Congiu, Daniel A. Dale, Oleg V. Egorov, Éric Emsellem, Cosima Eibensteiner, Christopher M. Faesi, Simon C. O. Glover, Kathryn Grasha, Brent Groves, Hamid Hassani, Jonathan D. Henshaw, Annie Hughes, María J. Jiménez-Donaire, Jaeyeon Kim, Ralf S. Klessen, Kathryn Kreckel, J. M. Diederik Kruijssen, Kirsten L. Larson, Janice Lee, Rebecca C. Levy, Daizhong Liu, Laura A. Lopez, Sharon E. Meidt, E. J. Murphy, Justus Neumann, Ismael Pessa, J. Pety, Amy Sardone, Jiayi Sun, David A. Thilker, A. Usero, Elizabeth J. Watkins, Cory M. Whitcomb, Thomas G. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institutes of Natural SciencesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsEuropean CommissionAustralian GovernmentAssociated UniversitiesEuropean Southern ObservatoryDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftAgence Nationale de la RechercheSpace Telescope Science InstituteNational Radio Astronomy ObservatoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science CouncilSmithsonian InstitutionNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsInfraredAstrophysicsExtinction (optical mineralogy)Star formationTracingTRACERInterstellar mediumStarsGalaxyAstronomyOpticsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We compare mid-infrared (mid-IR), extinction-corrected H α , and CO (2–1) emission at 70–160 pc resolution in the first four PHANGS–JWST targets. We report correlation strengths, intensity ratios, and power-law fits relating emission in JWST’s F770W, F1000W, F1130W, and F2100W bands to CO and H α . At these scales, CO and H α each correlate strongly with mid-IR emission, and these correlations are each stronger than the one relating CO to H α emission. This reflects that mid-IR emission simultaneously acts as a dust column density tracer, leading to a good match with the molecular-gas-tracing CO, and as a heating tracer, leading to a good match with the H α . By combining mid-IR, CO, and H α at scales where the overall correlation between cold gas and star formation begins to break down, we are able to separate these two effects. We model the mid-IR above I ν = 0.5 MJy sr −1 at F770W, a cut designed to select regions where the molecular gas dominates the interstellar medium (ISM) mass. This bright emission can be described to first order by a model that combines a CO-tracing component and an H α -tracing component. The best-fitting models imply that ∼50% of the mid-IR flux arises from molecular gas heated by the diffuse interstellar radiation field, with the remaining ∼50% associated with bright, dusty star-forming regions. We discuss differences between the F770W, F1000W, and F1130W bands and the continuum-dominated F2100W band and suggest next steps for using the mid-IR as an ISM tracer.

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)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations54
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesFrench-language works237,207