Galaxy Zoo <i>JWST</i>: up to 75 per cent of discs are featureless at 3 &lt; <i>z</i> &lt; 7
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We have not yet observed the epoch at which disc galaxies emerge in the Universe. While high-z measurements of large-scale features such as bars and spiral arms trace the evolution of disc galaxies, such methods cannot directly quantify featureless discs in the early Universe. Here, we identify a substantial population of apparently featureless disc galaxies in the Cosmic Evolution Early Release Science (CEERS) survey by combining quantitative visual morphologies of ${\sim} 7000$ galaxies from the Galaxy Zoo JWST CEERS project with a public catalogue of expert visual and parametric morphologies. While the highest redshift featured disc we identify is at $z_{\rm {phot}}=5.5$, the highest redshift featureless disc we identify is at $z_{\rm {phot}}=7.4$. The distribution of Sérsic indices for these featureless systems suggests that they truly are dynamically cold: disc-dominated systems have existed since at least $z\sim 7.4$. We place upper limits on the featureless disc fraction as a function of redshift, and show that up to 75 per cent of discs are featureless at $3.0< z< 7.4$. This is a conservative limit assuming all galaxies in the sample truly lack features. With further consideration of redshift effects and observational constraints, we find the featureless disc fraction in CEERS imaging at these redshifts is more likely ${\sim} 29{\!-\!}38~{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$. We hypothesize that the apparent lack of features in a third of high-redshift discs is due to a higher gas fraction in the early Universe, which allows the discs to be resistant to buckling and instabilities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".