Investigating the M <sub>GCS</sub>–M <sub> h </sub> Relation in the Most Massive Galaxies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The relation between the total mass contained in the globular clusters of a galaxy and the mass of its dark-matter halo has been found observationally to be nearly linear over five decades of mass. However, the high-mass end of this relation is not well determined from previous data and shows large scatter. We analyze the globular cluster systems (GCSs) of a homogeneous sample of 11 brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) through DOLPHOT photometry of their deep Hubble Space Telescope images in the F814W filter. We standardize the definition of M GCS, the total GCS mass, by using the GC total population within a limiting radius of 0.1R virial, while the dark-matter halo mass M h is determined from the weak-lensing calibration of M h versus M bary. When these 11 BCGs are added to the previously studied homogeneous catalog of Virgo member galaxies, a total value for η = M GCS/M h is found to be (3.0 ± 1.8internal) × 10−5, slightly higher than previous estimates but with much reduced uncertainty. Perhaps more importantly, the results suggest that the relation continues to have a near-linear shape at the highest galaxy masses, strongly reinforcing the conclusion that accreted GCs make a major contribution to the GC populations at high galaxy mass.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".