MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407720705 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452514

Galaxy mass-size segregation in the cosmic web from the CAVITY parent sample

2025· article· en· W4407720705 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabel Pérez, Anna Ferré-Mateu, G. Torres-Ríos, A. Zurita, M. Argudo–Fernández, Bahar Bidaran, L. Sánchez-Menguiano, T. Ruiz-Lara, Jesús Domínguez-Gómez, S. Duarte Puertas, D. Espada, J. Falcón‐Barroso, E. Florido, R. García-Benito, Andoni Jiménez, R. F. Peletier, Javier Román, P. M. Sánchez-Alarcón, P. Sánchez–Blázquez, P. Vásquez-Bustos

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Research in Astrophysics of Québec
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadJunta de AndalucíaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionConsejería de Transformación Económica, Industria, Conocimiento y Universidades
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsGalaxyCOSMIC cancer databaseAstronomySample (material)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. The mass-size relation is a fundamental galaxy scaling relation that is intrinsically linked to galaxy formation and evolution. The physical processes involved in galaxy growth leave their particular imprint on the relation between the stellar or total mass and galaxy size. Aims. We aim to explore the effect of the large-scale environment on the stellar mass-size relation using samples and a selection of added-value products from the Calar Alto Void Integral-field Treasury surveY (CAVITY) collaboration. Methods. We analysed the Petrosian R50 and R90 radii from SDSS DR16 images of a sample of ≈14 000 galaxies inhabiting cosmic voids, filaments and walls, and clusters, with a stellar mass range between 108.5 − 1011 M⊙. We investigated the mass-size relation with respect to the galaxy morphology, as well as with the star formation history (SFH), parametrised across a range of different timescales (T50, T70, and T90). Results. We find that, on average, early-type galaxies in voids are approximately 10−20% smaller than their counterparts in denser environments, such as filaments, walls, and clusters, regardless of when they assembled their mass. Additionally, evidence suggests that the mass-size relation for the more massive void galaxies within the early-type sample exhibits a shallower slope, compared to galaxies in denser large-scale environments. In contrast, early-type galaxies in filaments, walls, and clusters exhibit a more consistent mass-size distribution. For stellar masses of log(M⋆/M⊙) = 9 − 10.5, late-type cluster galaxies are smaller and more concentrated than those in lower density environments, such as filaments, walls, and voids; whereas void and filament+wall galaxies exhibit similar size and concentration values. However, for galaxies with masses above 1010.5 M⊙, the sizes of void galaxies become comparable to those in clusters. The trend of smaller low-mass cluster galaxies is primarily driven by galaxies with T50 greater than 7 Gyr. Conclusions. We conclude that the large-scale environment influences the mass-size relation of galaxies. Assuming that early-type galaxies undergo two growth phases, we find that they primarily grow their mass during the first phase of formation. In voids, the subsequent size growth from minor mergers is less pronounced. This is likely due to slower evolution and reduced minor merger activity or the fact that the void environment inherently has fewer accretion events, or even a combination of these effects. The change in slope for high-mass void galaxies suggests a lower rate of minor accretion. This trend is also evident in late-type void galaxies with masses above ≈1010.5 M⊙, where minor mergers contribute to their size growth. In contrast, late-type quenched cluster galaxies are smaller in size due to interactions within the cluster environment, with early infallers being more strongly affected by these environmental interactions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→