MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7082413609

Brightest cluster galaxies: the centre can(not?) hold

2025· other· en· W7082413609 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryPlanetary Science DivisionScience Mission DirectorateJet Propulsion LaboratoryTurun YliopistoQueen's UniversitySpace Telescope Science InstituteEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemCalifornia Institute of TechnologyEuropean CommissionJohns Hopkins UniversityQueen's University BelfastNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasNational Central UniversityGordon and Betty Moore FoundationDurham UniversitySmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCluster (spacecraft)HaloGalaxy clusterCentroidMass distributionDark matterGalaxy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore the persistence of the alignment of brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) with their local environment. We find that a significant fraction of BCGs do not coincide with the centroid of the X-ray gas distribution and/or show peculiar velocities (they are not at rest with respect to the cluster mean). Despite this, we find that BCGs are generally aligned with the cluster mass distribution even when they have significant offsets from the X-ray centre and significant peculiar velocities. The large offsets are not consistent with simple theoretical models. To account for these observations BCGs must undergo mergers preferentially along their major axis, the main infall direction. Such BCGs may be oscillating within the cluster potential after having been displaced by mergers or collisions, or the dark matter halo itself may not yet be relaxed.

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)0.002
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→