MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6929330553 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1501.06909

The nature of the [CII] emission in dusty star-forming galaxies from the SPT survey

2015· preprint· en· W6929330553 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyLuminosityLine (geometry)Emission spectrumFlux (metallurgy)Interstellar mediumTelescopeRADIUSLine-of-sight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present [CII] observations of 20 strongly lensed dusty star forming galaxies at 2.1 < z < 5.7 using APEX and Herschel. The sources were selected on their 1.4 mm flux (S_1.4mm > 20 mJy) from the South Pole Telescope survey, with far-infrared (FIR) luminosities determined from extensive photometric data. The [CII] line is robustly detected in 17 sources, all but one being spectrally resolved. Eleven out of 20 sources observed in [CII] also have low-J CO detections from ATCA. A comparison with mid- and high-J CO lines from ALMA reveals consistent [CII] and CO velocity profiles, suggesting that there is little differential lensing between these species. The [CII], low-J CO and FIR data allow us to constrain the properties of the interstellar medium. We find [CII] to CO(1-0) luminosity ratios in the SPT sample of 5200 +- 1800, with significantly less scatter than in other samples. This line ratio can be best described by a medium of [CII] and CO emitting gas with a higher [CII] than CO excitation temperature, high CO optical depth tau_CO >> 1, and low to moderate [CII] optical depth tau_CII ~< 1. The geometric structure of photodissociation regions allows for such conditions.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.149 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies→French-language works237,207→