Brightest group galaxies in COSMOS-Web: Evolution of the size-mass relation since z = 3.7
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the first comprehensive study of the structural evolution of brightest group galaxies (BGGs) from redshift z ≃ 0.08 to z = 3.7 using the James Webb Space Telescope ’s 255-hour COSMOS-Web program. This survey provides deep NIRCam imaging in four filters (F115W, F150W, F277W, and F444W) in ∼ 0.54 deg 2 , allowing robust size and morphological measurements for ∼ 1700 BGGs spanning ∼ 12 Gyr of cosmic history. High-resolution imaging enables consistent measurement of galaxy sizes in the rest-frame optical (red to near-infrared; ∼6000–8000 Å) across cosmic time through redshift-dependent filter selection. We classified BGGs as star-forming and quiescent using both rest-frame NUV– r – J colors and redshift-dependent specific star formation rate (sSFR) thresholds. Our structural analysis reveals that quiescent BGGs are systematically more compact than their star-forming counterparts across all redshifts, exhibiting steeper size–mass slopes ( α QG ∼ 0.6–1.2 vs. α SF ∼ 0.0–0.3). The effective radius evolves as R e ∝ (1+ z ) − α , with α = 0.96 ± 0.07 for star-forming BGGs and α = 1.24 ± 0.09 for quiescent BGGs, indicating stronger size growth in quenched systems. The corresponding growth factor at fixed stellar mass (log M ∗ = 10.7) from z = 3.7 to z = 0.08 is ∼ 4.4 for star-forming and ∼ 6.6 for quiescent BGGs. The intrinsic scatter in the size–mass relation increases toward higher redshift for both populations, reaching ∼ 0.3–0.4 dex at z > 2, reflecting greater structural diversity in the early universe. Compared to field galaxies, BGGs show systematically smaller sizes at fixed stellar mass, particularly among quiescent systems, highlighting environmental effects on galaxy structure. We further compare the evolution of the quiescent fraction, the Sérsic index, and ellipticity with those of field galaxies, finding consistent trends that reinforce our main conclusions. These results establish the foundation for understanding how group-scale environments shape the structural evolution of central galaxies and provide crucial constraints for models of galaxy formation in intermediate-mass dark matter halos.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".