MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386448166 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346777

Probing magnetic fields in the circumgalactic medium using polarization data from MIGHTEE

2023· article· en· W4386448166 on OpenAlexaff
K. Böckmann, M. Brüggen, V. Heesen, Aritra Basu, S. P. O’Sullivan, I. Heywood, M. Jarvis, A. Scaife, J. M. Stil, Russ Taylor, Nathan Adams, R. A. A. Bowler, Madalina N. Tudorache

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilCenter for High Performance ComputingUniversity of the Western CapeUniversity of PretoriaUniversity of Cape TownNational Research FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftComunidad de Madrid
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyRedshiftFaraday effectStar formationMagnetic fieldRadio galaxyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. The properties and evolution of magnetic fields surrounding galaxies are observationally largely unconstrained. The detection and study of these magnetic fields is important to understand galaxy evolution since magnetic fields are tracers for dynamical processes in the circumgalactic medium (CGM) and can have a significant impact on the evolution of the CGM. Aims. The Faraday rotation measure (RM) of the polarized light of background radio sources passing through the magnetized CGM of intervening galaxies can be used as a tracer for the strength and extent of magnetic fields around galaxies. Methods. We used rotation measures observed by the MIGHTEE-POL (MeerKAT International GHz Tiered Extragalactic Exploration polarization) survey by MeerKAT in the XMM-LSS and COSMOS fields to investigate the RM around foreground star-forming galaxies. We used spectroscopic catalogs of star-forming and blue cloud galaxies to measure the RM of MIGHTEE-POL sources as a function of the impact parameter from the intervening galaxy. In addition, we examined the dependence of the RM on redshift. We then repeated this procedure using a deeper galaxy catalog with photometric redshifts. Results. For the spectroscopic star-forming sample, we find a redshift-corrected |RM| excess of 5.6 ± 2.3 rad m −2 which corresponds to a 2.5 σ significance around galaxies with a median redshift of z = 0.46 for impact parameters below 130 kpc only selecting the intervenor with the smallest impact parameter. Making use of a photometric galaxy catalog and taking into account all intervenors with M g < −13.6 mag, the signal disappears. We find no indication for a correlation between redshift and RM, nor do we find a connection between the total number of intervenors to the total |RM|. Conclusions. We have presented tentative evidence that the CGM of star-forming galaxies is permeated by coherent magnetic fields within the virial radius. We conclude that mostly bright, star-forming galaxies with impact parameters less than 130 kpc significantly contribute to the RM of the background radio source.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→