MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117969388 · doi:10.1017/s1743921325000079

The FENIKS Survey: Spectroscopic Confirmation of Massive Quiescent Galaxies at <i>z</i> &gt; 3

2023· article· en· W7117969388 on OpenAlexaff
Jacqueline Antwi-Danso

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Astronomical Union · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalaxyStar formationBillion yearsLine (geometry)Galaxy formation and evolutionSpectroscopyBaryonCOSMIC cancer database

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We report spectroscopic confirmation of a z = 3.757 ± 0.0011 massive $({\rm{log}}({{\rm{M}}_*}/{M_ \odot }) = 10.86_{ - 0.03}^{ + 0.09})$ quiescent galaxy with 11 hours of Keck/MOSFIRE K -band observations. This galaxy was selected from the FENIKS survey, which uses deep Gemini/ Flamingos-2 K b K r imaging optimized for increased sensitivity to galaxies with strong Balmer/4000 Å breaks. Its rest-frame colors are consistent with a ∼1 Gyr old stellar population. This places it as one of the oldest objects at these redshifts, and challenges the notion that quiescent galaxies at z > 3 are all young post-starbursts. The star formation history suggests that its progenitor was in place by z ∼4 −7, reaching 10 10.6 M ȯ by z ∼ 5, which we have confirmed using ultra-deep medium resolution spectroscopy from JWST . These results are in line with the rapid formation and quenching timescales reported for similar massive quiescent galaxies at z > 3, implying extreme baryonic physics within the first billion years of cosmic history.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Astronomical UnionSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207