MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323656224 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acbd9c

Star Formation Laws and Efficiencies across 80 Nearby Galaxies

2023· article· en· W4323656224 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiayi Sun, Adam K. Leroy, Eve C. Ostriker, Sharon E. Meidt, Erik Rosolowsky, Eva Schinnerer, C. D. Wilson, Dyas Utomo, Francesco Belfiore, Guillermo A. Blanc, Éric Emsellem, Christopher M. Faesi, Brent Groves, Annie Hughes, Eric W. Koch, Kathryn Kreckel, Daizhong Liu, Hsi-An Pan, J. Pety, Miguel Querejeta, Alessandro Razza, Amy Sardone, A. Usero, Thomas G. Williams, Frank Bigiel, Alberto D. Bolatto, Mélanie Chevance, Daniel A. Dale, Jindra Gensior, Simon C. O. Glover, Kathryn Grasha, Jonathan D. Henshaw, María J. Jiménez-Donaire, Ralf S. Klessen, J. M. Diederik Kruijssen, E. J. Murphy, Lukas Neumann, Yu-Hsuan Teng, David A. Thilker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundNational Institutes of Natural SciencesAstrophysics DivisionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of California, Los AngelesJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Science and Technology CouncilAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloEuropean CommissionASTRONNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesCanada Research ChairsAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekAustralian GovernmentAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Science CouncilKorea Astronomy and Space Science InstituteEuropean Southern ObservatoryDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsCalifornia Institute of TechnologyCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSmithsonian InstitutionNational Radio Astronomy ObservatoryMax-Planck-GesellschaftSimons FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStar formationMolecular cloudAstrophysicsGalaxyPhysicsInterstellar mediumStar (game theory)Stars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We measure empirical relationships between the local star formation rate (SFR) and properties of the star-forming molecular gas on 1.5 kpc scales across 80 nearby galaxies. These relationships, commonly referred to as “star formation laws,” aim at predicting the local SFR surface density from various combinations of molecular gas surface density, galactic orbital time, molecular cloud free fall time, and the interstellar medium dynamical equilibrium pressure. Leveraging a multiwavelength database built for the Physics at High Angular Resolution in Nearby Galaxies (PHANGS) survey, we measure these quantities consistently across all galaxies and quantify systematic uncertainties stemming from choices of SFR calibrations and the CO-to-H 2 conversion factors. The star formation laws we examine show 0.3–0.4 dex of intrinsic scatter, among which the molecular Kennicutt–Schmidt relation shows a ∼10% larger scatter than the other three. The slope of this relation ranges β ≈ 0.9–1.2, implying that the molecular gas depletion time remains roughly constant across the environments probed in our sample. The other relations have shallower slopes ( β ≈ 0.6–1.0), suggesting that the star formation efficiency per orbital time, the star formation efficiency per free fall time, and the pressure-to-SFR surface density ratio (i.e., the feedback yield) vary systematically with local molecular gas and SFR surface densities. Last but not least, the shapes of the star formation laws depend sensitively on methodological choices. Different choices of SFR calibrations can introduce systematic uncertainties of at least 10%–15% in the star formation law slopes and 0.15–0.25 dex in their normalization, while the CO-to-H 2 conversion factors can additionally produce uncertainties of 20%–25% for the slope and 0.10–0.20 dex for the normalization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations92
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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