MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cold Dust in (Some) High z Supernova Host Galaxies

2005· preprint· en· W6910363928 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2005
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsSciencetech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyPhotometry (optics)SupernovaCosmic dustFlux (metallurgy)Extinction (optical mineralogy)InfraredCOSMIC cancer database

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present deep submillimetre photometry for 14 galaxies at z=0.5 that are hosts of type 1a supernovae, with the aim of examining the evolution of dust mass and extinction in normal galaxies. We combine these results with our previous observations of 17 z~0.5 SN1a hosts to look for any evolution in the dust content of normal galaxies between z=0 and z=0.5. The average observed frame 850micron flux of SN1a hosts in the full sample, excluding 2 bright individually detected objects, is 0.44 +/- 0.22 mJy. This flux level is consistent with there being little or no evolution in the dust content, or optical extinction, of normal galaxies from z=0 to z=0.5. One galaxy, the host of SN1996cf, is detected individually, and we also present a deep HST STIS image for this object. It appears to be an edge on disk system, similar to the submm bright host of SN1997ey. We thus examine the dust properties of these and one other individually detected object. 450-to-850 micron flux ratios and limits suggest that the dust in the two brightest submm sources, SN1996cf and SN1997ey, is cold, T ~20K, implying that they contain a substantial mass of dust ~10^9 Msun. The presence of two bright (F850 >7mJy) submm sources at z~0.5 in a sample of ostensibly normal galaxies is surprising, and has important implications. It supports the idea that a substantial part of the Cosmic Infrared Background (CIB) may be produced at z<1, while also suggesting that 'foreground' objects such as these may be a significant 'contaminant' in submm surveys. Finally, we examine the overall submm luminosity distribution at z=0.5 implied by our results, and conclude that either there is substantial evolution in the submm luminosity function from z=0 to 0.5, or our submm detected sources are somehow not representative of the bulk of galaxies at this redshift.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.145 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae→French-language works237,207→