Possible environmental quenching in an interacting little red dot pair at <i>z</i> ∼ 7
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the discovery of a z ∼ 7 group of galaxies that contains two little red dots (LRDs) just 3.3 kpc apart, along with three potential satellite galaxies, as part of the Canadian NIRISS Unbiased Cluster Survey (CANUCS). The spectral energy distributions (SEDs) of this LRD pair show evidence of a Balmer break, consistent with a recent (∼100 Myr) quenching of star formation. In contrast, the satellites are compatible with a recent-onset (∼100 Myr), ongoing burst of star formation. LRD1’s SED is consistent with a dust-free active galactic nucleus (AGN) being the source of the UV excess in the galaxy. The optical continuum would be powered by the emission from an obscured post-starburst and the AGN at a subdominant level. LRD2’s SED is more ambiguous, but it could also be indicative of a dust-free AGN. In this scenario, these LRDs would be massive ( M ⋆ ∼ 10 10 M ⊙ ) and dusty (A(V) > 1 mag) and the three satellites would be lower-mass objects ( M ⋆ ∼ 10 8 − 9 M ⊙ ) subject to low dust attenuations. The proximity of the two LRDs suggests that their interaction is responsible for their recent star formation histories, which can be interpreted as environmental bursting and quenching in the epoch of reionization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".