Galaxy pairs in<scp>The Three Hundred</scp>simulations II: studying bound ones and identifying them via machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Using the data set of The Three Hundred project, i.e. 324 hydrodynamical resimulations of cluster-sized haloes and the regions of radius 15 ${{h^{-1}\, {\rm Mpc}}}$ around them, we study galaxy pairs in high-density environments. By projecting the galaxies’ 3D coordinates onto a 2D plane, we apply observational techniques to find galaxy pairs. Based on a previous theoretical study on galaxy groups in the same simulations, we are able to classify the observed pairs into ‘true’ or ‘false’, depending on whether they are gravitationally bound or not. We find that the fraction of true pairs (purity) crucially depends on the specific thresholds used to find the pairs, ranging from around 30 to more than 80 per cent in the most restrictive case. Nevertheless, in these very restrictive cases, we see that the completeness of the sample is low, failing to find a significant number of true pairs. Therefore, we train a machine learning algorithm to help us identify these true pairs based on the properties of the galaxies that constitute them. With the aid of the machine learning model trained with a set of properties of all the objects, we show that purity and completeness can be boosted significantly using the default observational thresholds. Furthermore, this machine learning model also reveals the properties that are most important when distinguishing true pairs, mainly the size and mass of the galaxies, their spin parameter, gas content, and shape of their stellar components.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".