Flows of Local Sheet dwarfs in relation to the Council of Giants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The kinematics of isolated dwarf galaxies in the Local Sheet have been studied to ascertain how the Council of Giants has affected flows. Peculiar velocities parallel to the Sheet in the frame of reference of the Council ascend steeply from negative to positive values on the near side of the Council at a heliocentric radius of $2.4 \pm 0.2 \, \rm Mpc$ . They descend to pre-ponderantly negative values at a radius of $3.9^{+0.4}_{-0.5} \, \rm Mpc$, which is near the middle of the Council realm. Such behaviour is evidence for a flow field set up by the combined gravitational effects of the Local Group and Council, the ascending node being where their gravitational forces balance. Receding dwarfs on the near side of the Council are pre-dominantly located in the direction of M94, although this may be a manifestation of the limitations of sampling. If M94 were entirely responsible for the placement of the ascending node, then the galaxy’s total mass relative to the Local Group would have to be $0.8^{+0.4}_{-0.3}$, the same as indicated by the orbits of satellite galaxies. Rather, if the placement of the ascending node were set by matter distributed evenly in azimuth at the Council’s radius, then the required total mass relative to the Local Group would have to be $4^{+3}_{-2}$, which is 30 per cent to 40 per cent lower than implied by satellite motions but still consistent within errors. The mere existence of the ascending node confirms that the Council of Giants limits the gravitational reach of the Local Group.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".