MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416079319 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556368

Structural evolution of quiescent galaxies at intermediate redshifts at UV and red rest-frame wavelengths

2025· article· en· W4416079319 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michele Pizzardo, Ivana Damjanov, Jubee Sohn, Margaret J. Geller

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsGalaxyStellar populationStellar massPhotometry (optics)RedshiftPopulationWavelengthSpectroscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We derived structural parameters for a mass-limited sample ( M ★ > 10 10 M ⊙ ) of 27 000 quiescent galaxies with 0.2 < z < 0.6 using grizy photometry from Subaru/Hyper Suprime-Cam and dense spectroscopy from the HectoMAP survey. Based on Sérsic profile fits in all five bands, we modeled the wavelength dependence of the circularized half-light radius ( R e, c , a proxy for size) and Sérsic index ( n , a proxy for central concentration). We estimated the structural parameters in two rest frames: UV (3500 Å, tracing young and metal-poor stellar populations) and red (7000 Å, tracing the stellar mass distribution). Combined with the stellar mass, redshift, and D n 4000, the estimates of R e, c and n enable us to explore the evolution in the correlations between structural properties and stellar mass for quiescent galaxies with different stellar population ages. At intermediate redshift, quiescent galaxies at all stellar masses exhibit a systematic decline in size and a rise in central concentration with the rest-frame wavelength. Over the full redshift range of the sample, variations in the Sérsic index are larger for galaxies that recently joined the quiescent population (newcomers, with 1.5 < D n 4000 < 1.6) than for descendants of galaxies that are already quiescent at the survey limit, z ∼ 0.6 (aging, or resident, population). Variations in size with the rest-frame wavelength are greater for newcomers than for the resident population, with z < 0.3. The combined evidence supports inside-out quenching as the dominant mechanism halting star formation during this epoch. The normalization of the size-stellar mass relation (the typical size of a M ★ ∼ 10 11 M ⊙ quiescent galaxy) increases by ∼30% between z ∼ 0.6 and z ∼ 0.2 in the red rest frame and remains constant in the rest-frame UV. Size growth is age-independent, and newcomers are found to be ∼20% larger than the aging population across redshifts and rest frames. Based on the Sérsic index-stellar mass relation in the UV, we find that M ★ ∼ 10 11 M ⊙ quiescent galaxies maintain a constant central concentration ( n ∼ 4 for the aging population and n ∼ 2 for newcomers). In the red rest frame, both subpopulations exhibit de Vaucouleurs profiles after accounting for selection effects. The larger sizes and disk-like UV profiles of newcomers link them to their direct progenitors in the star-forming population. For the aging population, the steady red rest-frame growth and elevated central concentration in both red and UV rest frames suggest minor mergers with progressively redder satellites at lower redshifts as the primary driver of galaxy evolution in the quiescent phase. Large samples of low-surface-brightness galaxies available in forthcoming sensitive large-area imaging surveys are ideal testbeds for this prediction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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