MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Near infrared spectroscopy of starburst galaxies

2001· preprint· en· W6929190316 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2001
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyStar formationLuminous infrared galaxySpectroscopyUniverseInfraredStellar mass

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Abridged) We present new K-band spectroscopy for a sample of 48 starburst galaxies, obtained using UKIRT in Hawaii. This constitutes a fair sample of the most common types of starburst galaxies found in the nearby Universe. The variety of near infrared spectral features shown by these galaxies implies different bursts characteristics, which suggests that we survey galaxies with different star formation histories or at different stages of their burst evolution. Using synthetic starburst models, we conclude that the best ensemble of parameters which describe starburst galaxies in the nearby universe are a constant rate of star formation, a Salpeter IMF with an upper mass cutoff equal to 30 solar mass and bursts ages between 10 Myr and 1 Gyr. The model is fully consistent with the differences observed in the optical and FIR between the different types of starbursts. It suggests that HII galaxies have younger bursts and lower metallicities than SBNGs, while LIRGs have younger bursts but higher metallicities. Our observations suggest that the starburst phenomenon must be a sustained or self--sustained phenomenon: either star formation is continuous in time or multiple bursts happen in sequence over a relatively long period of time. The generality of our observations implies that this is a characteristic of starburst galaxies in the nearby Universe.

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 score0.005
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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.144 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals→French-language works237,207→