MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396707654 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad36c4

The Faint Satellite System of NGC 253: Insights into Low-density Environments and No Satellite Plane*

2024· article· en· W4396707654 on OpenAlexaff
Burçı̇n Mutlu-Pakdı̇l, David J. Sand, Denija Crnojević, Paul Bennet, Michael G. Jones, Kristine Spekkens, Ananthan Karunakaran, Dennis Zaritsky, Nelson Caldwell, Catherine E. Fielder, Puragra Guhathakurta, Anil C. Seth, Joshua D. Simon, Jay Strader, Elisa Toloba

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Theoretical AstrophysicsUniversity of TorontoRoyal Military College of CanadaQueen's University
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsGalaxySatellite galaxyAstrophysicsSatelliteMilky WayAstronomyLuminosityLocal GroupDwarf galaxyLuminosity functionStellar massStar formation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We have conducted a systematic search around the Milky Way (MW) analog NGC 253 (D = 3.5 Mpc), as a part of the Panoramic Imaging Survey of Centaurus and Sculptor (PISCeS)—a Magellan+Megacam survey to identify dwarfs and other substructures in resolved stellar light around MW-mass galaxies outside of the Local Group. In total, NGC 253 has five satellites identified by PISCeS within 100 kpc with an absolute V-band magnitude of M V < −7. We have additionally obtained deep Hubble Space Telescope imaging of four reported candidates beyond the survey footprint: Do III, Do IV, and dw0036m2828 are confirmed to be satellites of NGC 253, while SculptorSR is found to be a background galaxy. We find no convincing evidence for the presence of a plane of satellites surrounding NGC 253. We construct its satellite luminosity function, which is complete down to M V ≲ −8 out to 100 kpc and M V ≲ −9 out to 300 kpc, and compare it to those calculated for other Local Volume galaxies. Exploring trends in satellite counts and star-forming fractions among satellite systems, we find relationships with host stellar mass, environment, and morphology, pointing to a complex picture of satellite formation, and a successful model has to reproduce all of these trends.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→