NIHAO III: the constant disc gas mass conspiracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show that the cool gas masses of galactic discs reach a steady state that lasts many Gyr after their last major merger in cosmological hydrodynamic simulations. The mass of disc gas, Mgas, depends mostly upon a galaxy virial mass and halo's spin, and less upon stellar feedback. Haloes with low spin have high star formation efficiency and lower disc gas mass. Similarly, lower stellar feedback leads to more star formation so the gas mass ends up being nearly the same regardless of stellar feedback strength. Rather than regulating cool gas mass, stellar feedback regulates the mass of stars that forms. Even considering spin, the Mgas relation with halo mass, M200 only shows a factor of 3 scatter. The simulated Mgas–M200 relation shows a break at M200 = 2 × 1011 M⊙ that corresponds to an observed break in the Mgas–M⋆ relation. The galaxies that maintain constant disc masses share a common halo gas density profile shape in all the simulated galaxies. In their outer regions, the profiles are isothermal. Where the profile rises above n = 10−3 cm−3, the gas readily cools and the profile steepens. Inside the disc, rotation supports gas with a flatter density profile. Energy injection from stellar feedback provides pressure support to the halo gas to prevent runaway cooling flows. The constant gas mass makes simpler models for galaxy formation possible, either using a ‘bathtub’ model for star formation rates or when modelling chemical evolution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".