MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380083165 · doi:10.1017/s1743921322004240

On the H <scp>i</scp> Content of MaNGA Major Merger Pairs

2021· article· en· W4380083165 on OpenAlexaff
Qingzheng Yu, Taotao Fang, Shuai Feng, Bo Zhang, C. K. Xu, Yunting Wang, Lei Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyPhysicsAstrophysicsStar formationGalaxy mergerContent (measure theory)TelescopeGalaxy formation and evolutionGas consumptionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To study the role of H i content in galaxy interactions, we select galaxy pairs and control galaxies from the SDSS-IV MaNGA IFU survey, adopting kinematic asymmetry as a new effective indicator to describe the merger stage. With archival data from the HI-MaNGA survey and new observations from the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST), we investigate the differences in H i gas fraction (fH i), star formation rate (SFR), and H i star formation efficiency (SFEH i) between pairs and controls. Our results suggest that on average the H i gas fraction of major-merger pairs is marginally decreased by ∼ 15% relative to isolated galaxies, and paired galaxies during pericentric passage show weakly decreased fH i (−0.10 ± 0.05 dex), significantly enhanced SFR (0.42 ± 0.11 dex), and SFEH i (0.48 ± 0.12 dex). We propose the marginally detected H i depletion may originate from the gas consumption in fueling the enhanced H2 reservoir of galaxy pairs.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.196
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical UnionSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207