Close Major-merger Pairs at <i>z</i> = 0: Star-forming Galaxies with Pseudobulges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a study of star-forming galaxies (SFGs) with pseudobulges (bulges with Sérsic index n < 2) in a local close major-merger galaxy pair sample (H-KPAIR). With data from new aperture photometries in the optical and near-infrared bands (aperture size of 7 kpc) and from the literature, we find that the mean Age of central stellar populations in Spirals with pseudobulges is consistent with that of disky galaxies and is nearly constant against the bulge-to-total ratio (B/T). Paired Spirals have a slightly lower fraction of pure disk galaxies (B/T ≤ 0.1) than their counterparts in the control sample. Compared to SFGs with classical bulges, those with pseudobulges have a higher (>2 σ ) mean of specific star formation rate (sSFR) enhancement (sSFR enh = 0.33 ± 0.07 versus sSFR enh = 0.12 ± 0.06) and broader scatter (by ∼1 dex). The eight SFGs that have the highest sSFR enh in the sample all have pseudobulges. A majority (69%) of paired SFGs with strong enhancement (having sSFR more than 5 times the median of the control galaxies) have pseudobulges. The Spitzer data show that the pseudobulges in these galaxies are tightly linked to nuclear/circum-nuclear starbursts. Pseudobulge SFGs in S+S and in S+E pairs have significantly (>3 σ ) different sSFR enhancement, with the means of sSFR enh = 0.45 ± 0.08 and −0.04 ± 0.11, respectively. We find a decrease in the sSFR enhancements with the density of the environment for SFGs with pseudobulges. Since a high fraction (5/11) of pseudobulge SFGs in S+E pairs are in rich groups/clusters (local density N 1Mpc ≥ 7), the dense environment might be the cause for their low sSFR enh .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".