The <i>JWST</i> EXCELS survey: too much, too young, too fast? Ultra-massive quiescent galaxies at 3 &lt; z &lt; 5
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We report ultra-deep, medium-resolution spectroscopic observations for four quiescent galaxies with log$_{10}(M_*/\mathrm{M_\odot })\gt 11$ at $3 \lt z \lt 5$. These data were obtained with JWST NIRSpec as part of the Early eXtragalactic Continuum and Emission Line Science (EXCELS) survey, which we introduce in this work. The first two galaxies are newly selected from PRIMER UDS imaging, both at $z=4.62$ and separated by 860 pkpc on the sky, within a larger structure for which we confirm several other members. Both formed at $z\simeq 8-10$. These systems could plausibly merge by the present day to produce a local massive elliptical galaxy. The other two ultra-massive quiescent galaxies are previously known at $z=3.99$ and 3.19, with the latter (ZF-UDS-7329) having been the subject of debate as potentially too old and too massive to be accommodated by the $\Lambda$-CDM halo-mass function. Both exhibit high stellar metallicities, and for ZF-UDS-7329 we are able to measure the $\alpha -$enhancement, obtaining [Mg/Fe] = $0.42^{+0.19}_{-0.17}$. We finally evaluate whether these four galaxies are consistent with the $\Lambda$-CDM halo-mass function using an extreme value statistics approach. We find that the $z=4.62$ objects and the $z=3.19$ object are unlikely within our area under the assumption of standard stellar fractions ($f_*\simeq 0.1-0.2$). However, these objects roughly align with the most massive galaxies expected under the assumption of 100 per cent conversion of baryons to stars ($f_*$=1). Our results suggest extreme galaxy formation physics during the first billion years, but no conflict with $\Lambda$-CDM cosmology.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".