Candidate ram-pressure stripped galaxies in six low-redshift clusters revealed from ultraviolet imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The assembly of galaxy clusters is understood to be a hierarchical process with a continuous accretion of galaxies over time, which increases the cluster size and mass. Late-type galaxies that fall into clusters can undergo ram-pressure stripping, forming extended gas tails within which star formation can happen. The number, location, and tail orientations of such galaxies provide clues about the galaxy infall process, the assembly of the cluster over time, and the consequences of infall for galaxy evolution. Here, we utilise the ∼0.5-degree diameter circular field of the Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope to image six galaxy clusters at z < 0.06 that are known to contain ‘jellyfish’ galaxies. We searched for stripping candidates in the ultraviolet images of these clusters, which revealed 54 candidates showing signs of unilateral extra-planar emission, due to ram-pressure stripping. Seven candidates had already been identified as likely stripping based on optical B -band imaging. We identified 47 new candidates through UV imaging. Spectroscopic redshift information is available for 39 of these candidate galaxies, of which 19 are associated with six clusters. The galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts that are not part of the clusters appear to be within structures at different redshifts identified as additional peaks in the redshift distribution of galaxies, indicating that they might be ram-pressure stripped or disturbed galaxies in other structures along the line of sight. We examine the orbital history of these galaxies based on their location in the position-velocity phase-space diagram and explore a possible connection to the orientation of the tail direction among cluster member candidates. There are limitations due to different integration times and imaging different regions with respect to the cluster centre. The tails of confirmed cluster member galaxies are found to be oriented away from the cluster centre.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".