The First Quenched Galaxies: When and How?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many quiescent galaxies discovered in the early Universe by JWST raise fundamental questions on when and how these galaxies became and stayed quenched. Making use of the latest version of the semianalytic model GAEA that provides good agreement with the observed quenched fractions up to z ∼ 3, we make predictions for the expected fractions of quiescent galaxies up to z ∼ 7 and analyze the main quenching mechanism. We find that in a simulated box of 685 Mpc on a side, the first quenched massive (M ⋆ ∼ 1011 M ⊙), Milky Way–mass, and low-mass (M ⋆ ∼ 109.5 M ⊙) galaxies appear at z ∼ 4.5, z ∼ 6.2, and before z = 7, respectively. Most quenched galaxies identified at early redshifts remain quenched for more than 1 Gyr. Independently of galaxy stellar mass, the dominant quenching mechanism at high redshift is accretion disk feedback (quasar winds) from a central massive black hole, which is triggered by mergers in massive and Milky Way–mass galaxies and by disk instabilities in low-mass galaxies. Environmental stripping becomes increasingly more important at lower redshift.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".