The Effect of Galaxy Interactions on Starbursts in Milky Way-mass Galaxies in FIRE Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Simulations and observations suggest that galaxy interactions may enhance the star formation rate (SFR) in merging galaxies. One proposed mechanism is the torque exerted on the gas and stars in the larger galaxy by the smaller galaxy. We analyze the interaction torques and star formation activity on six galaxies from the FIRE-2 simulation suite with masses comparable to the Milky Way galaxy at redshift z = 0. We trace the halos from z = 3.6 to z = 0, calculating the torque exerted by the nearby galaxies on the gas in the central galaxy. We calculate the correlation between the torque and the SFR across the simulations for various mass ratios. For near-equal-stellar-mass-ratio interactions in the galaxy sample, occurring between z = 1.2−3.6, there is a positive and statistically significant correlation between the torque from nearby galaxies on the gas of the central galaxies and the SFR. For all other samples, no statistically significant correlation is found between the torque and the SFR. Our analysis shows that some, but not all, major interactions cause starbursts in the simulated Milky Way-mass galaxies, and that most starbursts are not caused by galaxy interactions. The transition from “bursty” at high redshift (z ≳ 1) to “steady” star formation state at later times is independent of the interaction history of the galaxies, and most of the interactions do not leave significant imprints on the overall trend of the star formation history of the galaxies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".