MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Two spectroscopically confirmed galaxy structures at

2015· article· en· W6884523424 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedshiftVelocity dispersionGalaxyCluster (spacecraft)Galaxy clusterWeak gravitational lensingBrightest cluster galaxyTelescopeUniverseSpectroscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

\n Context. Galaxy evolution is known to depend on environment since it differs in clusters and in the field, but studies are sometimes limited to the relatively nearby Universe (z < 0.5). It is still necessary to increase our knowledge of cluster galaxy properties above z = 0.5.\n Aims. In a previous paper we have detected several cluster candidates at z> 0.5 as part of a systematic search for clusters in the Canada France Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey by applying the Adami & MAzure Cluster FInder (AMACFI), based on photometric redshifts. We focus here on two of them, located in the Deep 3 (hereafter D3) field: D3-6 and D3-43.\n Methods. We have obtained spectroscopy with Gemini/GMOS instrument and measured redshifts for 23 and 14 galaxies in the two structures. These redshifts were combined with those available in the literature. A dynamical and a weak lensing analysis were also performed, together with the study of X-ray Chandra archive data.\n Results. Cluster D3-6 is found to be a single structure of eight spectroscopically confirmed members at an average redshift z = 0.607, with a velocity dispersion of 423 km s-1. It appears to be a relatively low-mass cluster. D3-43-S3 has 46 spectroscopically confirmed members at an average redshift z = 0.739. The cluster can be decomposed into two main substructures, having a velocity dispersion of about 600 and 350 km s-1. An explanation of the fact that D3-43-S3 is detected through weak lensing (only marginally, at the ~3σ level) but not in X-rays could be that the two substructures are just beginning to merge more or less along the line of sight. We also show that D3-6 and D3-43-S3 have similar global galaxy luminosity functions, stellar mass functions, and star formation rate (SFR) distributions. The only differences are that D3-6 exhibits a lack of faint early-type galaxies, a deficit of extremely high stellar mass galaxies compared to D3-43-S3, and an excess of very high SFR galaxies.\n Conclusions. This study shows the power of techniques based on photometric redshifts to detect low to moderately massive structures, even at z ~ 0.75. Combined-approach cluster surveys such as EUCLID are crucial to find and study these clusters at these relatively high redshifts. Finally, we show that photometric redshift techniques are also well suited to study the galaxy content and properties of the clusters (galaxy types, SFRs, etc.).\n

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology)Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207