adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Temporal and Spectral Analysis of the Unique and Second-brightest Gamma-Ray Burst GRB 230307A: Insights from GECAM and Fermi/GBM Observations
Authors: R. Moradi, C. W. Wang, B. Zhang, 冰 张, Y. Wang, 瑜 王, S.-L. Xiong, 少林 熊, S.-X. Yi, W.-J. Tan, M. Karlica, S.-N. Zhang, 双南 张
Figure caption: Joint GECAM+Fermi/GBM temporal and spectral evolution of GRB 230307A. The first panel displays the flux evolution, F  E (t), in erg cm−2 s −1. The second panel shows the photon fluence evolution, Φ(t), in photons cm−2. The third panel shows the photon flux evolution, N(t), in photons cm−2 s −1. The forth panel shows the spectral peak energy evolution, E p(t), in keV. The fifth panel shows φ p(E p) defined in Equation (1). The peak of the pulse is t p = 4.95 s. The interval from ﹩{t}_{{d}_{1}}﹩=7.2 s to ﹩{t}_{{d}_{2}}﹩ = 27 s indicates the time interval of the decay phase studied.
Paper: Temporal and Spectral Analysis of the Unique and Second-brightest Gamma-Ray Burst GRB 230307A: Insights from GECAM and Fermi/GBM Observations
Authors: R. Moradi, C. W. Wang, B. Zhang, 冰 张, Y. Wang, 瑜 王, S.-L. Xiong, 少林 熊, S.-X. Yi, W.-J. Tan, M. Karlica, S.-N. Zhang, 双南 张
Figure caption: The plot represents the normalized count rate obtained from the simulation of randomized shell collisions in the internal shock model vs. time. Fifty shells are ejected, each characterized by randomly chosen initial thickness, Lorentz factor, and mass from log-distributed random distributions. The Lorentz factors range from 100 to 1000, the mass spans from 1028 to 1029, and the initial thickness varies from 1010 to 2 × 1010, all in cgs units. The ejection times from the central engine follow a linear distribution, with values ranging from 0 to 20 s in the rest frame of the GRB central engine.
Paper: Temporal and Spectral Analysis of the Unique and Second-brightest Gamma-Ray Burst GRB 230307A: Insights from GECAM and Fermi/GBM Observations
Authors: R. Moradi, C. W. Wang, B. Zhang, 冰 张, Y. Wang, 瑜 王, S.-L. Xiong, 少林 熊, S.-X. Yi, W.-J. Tan, M. Karlica, S.-N. Zhang, 双南 张
Figure caption: The postmaximum flux F(t) best fitted with a broken power-law model. The best-fit parameters indicate a break time at 27 ± 2 s, with the first index α 1 = 1.55 ± 0.10 and the second index α 2 = 2.98 ± 0.16.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 0851+203 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 1.″12 × 0.″39 with a PA of 72°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 3.833 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.09, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 0.25 Jy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 1418+546 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 1.″14 × 0.″43 with a PA of −78°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.63 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.18, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 25 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 1437+398 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The beam is 0.″79 × 0.″51 with a PA of −73°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 47.5 mJy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.09, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 50 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 1218+304 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 1.″23 × 1.″15 with a PA of 76°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 48.3 mJy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.09, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 2.5 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 1101+384 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 0.″62 × 0.″32 with a PA of −80°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.38 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.09, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 25 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 1424+240 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 1.″32 × 0.″40 with a PA of −73°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.35 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.09, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 5 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Temporal and Spectral Analysis of the Unique and Second-brightest Gamma-Ray Burst GRB 230307A: Insights from GECAM and Fermi/GBM Observations
Authors: R. Moradi, C. W. Wang, B. Zhang, 冰 张, Y. Wang, 瑜 王, S.-L. Xiong, 少林 熊, S.-X. Yi, W.-J. Tan, M. Karlica, S.-N. Zhang, 双南 张
Figure caption: The best-fit parameters of F  E (t), E p(t), and N(t) during the decay phase of GRB 230307A are depicted in the plot. It is evident that from ﹩{t}_{{{\rm{d}}}_{1}}﹩ = 7.2 to ﹩{t}_{{{\rm{d}}}_{2}}﹩ = 27 s, the best-fit results align closely with the predictions of the IS model. Beyond ﹩{t}_{{{\rm{d}}}_{2}}﹩ = 27 s, the observed emission corresponds to the high-latitude emission (HLE) phase.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 1553+113 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 1.″76 × 0.″37 with a PA of −59°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.31 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.7, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 8.33 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 2308+098 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The inset shows the core region. The beam is 1.″95 × 1.″26 with a PA of 38°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 87.05 mJy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.18, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 5″ length of the vector corresponds to 2.5 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 1302-102 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 3.″33 × 1.″06 with a PA of 47°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.68 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.12, 0.12, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 6.25 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 1425+267 superimposed with (top) red polarized intensity vectors and (bottom) the in-band spectral index image. The insets show the core region and the southern hot-spot region. The beam is 1.″26 × 1.″15 with a PA of −69°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 25.90 mJy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.09, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 20″ length of the vector corresponds to 1 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 1545+210 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The inset shows the core region. The beam is 1.″56 × 1.″05 with a PA of 69°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 98.25 mJy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.18, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45,  90) Jy beam−1. A 5″ length of the vector corresponds to 8.33 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 2209+184 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The beam is 1.″29 × 1.″07 with a PA of 62°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.103 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−1.9, 1.9, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 1.25 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of BL Lac PG 2254+075 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The VLBI jet direction is shown by the green arrow. The beam is 1.″57 × 1.″12 with a PA of 51°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.587 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−1.4, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 2.50 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 1512+370 superimposed with (top) red polarized intensity vectors and (bottom) the in-band spectral index image. The inset shows the core region. The beam is 1.″38 × 1.″03 with a PA of 88°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 42.6 mJy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.06, 0.06, 0.09, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 1 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: VLA 6 GHz contour image of quasar PG 2251+113 superimposed with (left) red polarized intensity vectors and (right) the in-band spectral index image. The beam is 1.″40 × 1.″04 with a PA of 35°. The peak surface brightness, I  P , is 0.134 Jy beam−1 and the contour levels are I  P  × 10−2 × (−0.18, 0.18, 0.35, 0.7, 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.25, 22.5, 45, 90) Jy beam−1. A 1″ length of the vector corresponds to 2.5 mJy beam−1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: Core fractional polarization FPC (percent) vs. log of BH masses (M BH/M ⊙) (left) and FPC vs. log of jet power (﹩\bar{Q}﹩ in erg s−1) (right) for the PG quasars.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: IR color–color diagrams depicting the distinctive natures of WR (in red) and non-WR candidates (in blue) in the MW. The non-WR sources include different types of objects, such as MS, AGB, Be, RSG, HMXB, and LPV, etc.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Census of stellar candidates based on the object types in Dataset-1.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: Core fractional polarization FPC (percent) vs. core spectral index α c (left), and log of accretion power (﹩\dot{M}{c}^{2}﹩ in erg s−1) vs. log of jet power (﹩\bar{Q}﹩ in erg s−1) (right) for the PG quasars. The dashed lines shows ﹩\bar{Q}={10}^{-4}\dot{M}{c}^{2}﹩ and ﹩\bar{Q}\,=\,{10}^{-2}\dot{M}{c}^{2}﹩. The quasars are numbered by their S.No. in Table 3.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: The f1-scores of the models with successive combinations of features (from left to right) show the increase in the model’s prediction efficiency and eventually reach their highest values with these eight significant features.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Positional distribution of Galactic stellar sources included in (a) Dataset-1 (blue represents non-WR and red represents WR candidates) and (b) Dataset-2 (blue represents non-WR, orange represents WC-type, and green represents WN-type objects).
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: Core fractional polarization FPC (percent) vs. log of gamma-ray luminosity L  γ  (erg s−1) (left), and FPC vs. log of synchrotron peak frequency ν peak (Hz) (right) of the PG BL Lac objects.
Paper: Investigating Differences in the Palomar-Green Blazar Population Using Polarization
Authors: Janhavi Baghel, P. Kharb, T. Hovatta, Luis C. Ho, C. Harrison, E. Lindfors, Silpa S., S. Gulati
Figure caption: Core fractional polarization FPC (percent) vs. log of BH masses (M BH/M ⊙) (left), and FPC vs. log of jet power (﹩\bar{Q}﹩ in erg s−1) (right) of the PG BL Lac objects.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Census of stellar candidates with WR subtypes in Dataset-2.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Predictions by the best XGB classifier on TsD-1. The gray circles represent non-WR candidates (that are mainly the Be-type and AGB sources), while the green diamonds and magenta circles represent the actual and model WR candidates, respectively. The overlapping symbols (i.e., the green-colored diamonds and magenta-colored circles) represent the TPs.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Predictions by the best RF classifier on TsD-1. The gray circles represent non-WR candidates (the same as in Figure 9), while the blue diamonds and orange circles represent the actual and model-predicted WR candidates, respectively. The TPs are identified by overlapping blue diamonds and orange circles.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Galactic distribution of possible WR star candidates (marked as blue crosses) predicted by the XGB object type classifier (see Section 4.3). The data set is overplotted on the Galactic plane, showing massive star formation zones across different arms of the MW (for details, see M. J. Reid et al. 2019).
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Confusion matrix derived from the WR subtype classifier predictions (see Section 4.2).
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: PR curve for the optimized models for the classification of the objects. Both models have identical AUCs, but XGB misclassifies fewer WR stars (i.e., higher recall) compared to RF, as indicated by the slower growth of recall of RF against XGB while compromising their precisions. The black and red points mark the maximum f1-scores achieved by the RF and XGB models, respectively, showing a higher f1-score for XGB than RF.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Plot showing the first decision tree (learner) of the employed XGB model. The internal nodes store the features that are branched based on a criterion, and the final predictions are stored in the leaf nodes.
Paper: Classification of Wolf–Rayet Stars Using Ensemble-based Machine Learning Algorithms
Authors: Subhajit Kar, Rajorshi Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna Das, Ylva Pihlström, Megan O. Lewis
Figure caption: Confusion matrices derived from the application of the (a) RF classifier and (b) XGB classifier on TsD-1. The true labels (on the y-axis) indicate the actual class, while the model predictions are labeled on the x-axis of the diagrams (see Section 4.1 for further information).
Paper: Emergence of the Galaxy Morphology–Star Formation Activity–Clustercentric Radius Relations in Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Sungwook E. Hong, Changbom Park, Preetish K. Mishra, Juhan Kim, Brad K. Gibson, Yonghwi Kim, C. Gareth Few, Christophe Pichon, Jihye Shin, Jaehyun Lee
Figure caption: Evolution of various physical parameters of HR5 cluster galaxies from z = 6 to 0.625. From top to bottom panels: stellar mass (M *), normalized clustercentric radius (d/R 200), asymmetric parameter (A), Sérsic index (n S), and specific star formation rate (sSFR). Note that the hosting clusters and the comoving values of their virial radii R 200 are defined as those at z = 0.625. From left to right panels: d(z f)/R 200 < 0.1, 0.1 < d(z f)/R 200 < 0.3, and 0.3 < d(z f)/R 200 < 1. Thick and thin red lines show the median and 68% percentiles, respectively. Thin gray lines show the histories of 100 selected individual galaxies in each normalized clustercentric radius bin. Dashes from top to bottom panels: M * = 109 M ⊙, d = 0.1R 200 (central region), A = 0.4 (regular/irregular threshold), n S = 1.5 (disk/spheroid threshold), and sSFR = 0.05 Gyr−1 (active/passive threshold).
Paper: Emergence of the Galaxy Morphology–Star Formation Activity–Clustercentric Radius Relations in Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Sungwook E. Hong, Changbom Park, Preetish K. Mishra, Juhan Kim, Brad K. Gibson, Yonghwi Kim, C. Gareth Few, Christophe Pichon, Jihye Shin, Jaehyun Lee
Figure caption: Evolution of various parameter–parameter relations between z = 1 (yellow) and 0.625 (dark blue) for HR5 central (left) and outskirts (right) galaxies. From top-left to a counterclockwise direction in each panel: M *–(d/R 200), M *–A, M *–n S, (d/R 200)–n S, and (d/R 200)–A. Note that the number of lines associated with n S is less than others because n S can be calculated only for galaxies having A < 0.4.
Paper: Emergence of the Galaxy Morphology–Star Formation Activity–Clustercentric Radius Relations in Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Sungwook E. Hong, Changbom Park, Preetish K. Mishra, Juhan Kim, Brad K. Gibson, Yonghwi Kim, C. Gareth Few, Christophe Pichon, Jihye Shin, Jaehyun Lee
Figure caption: The clustercentric radial profiles of M *, A, n S, and sSFR (from top to bottom) for HR5 galaxies with M * > 5 × 109 M ⊙ (dots) at z = 0.625, 0.8, 1, 1.8, 2, and 2.6 (from left to right). Colors: M * (not shown in the top panels). Error bars: the median and 68% confidence interval derived from 9999 bootstrapped samples from each d/R 200 bin.
Paper: Emergence of the Galaxy Morphology–Star Formation Activity–Clustercentric Radius Relations in Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Sungwook E. Hong, Changbom Park, Preetish K. Mishra, Juhan Kim, Brad K. Gibson, Yonghwi Kim, C. Gareth Few, Christophe Pichon, Jihye Shin, Jaehyun Lee
Figure caption: Evolution of stellar mass vs. specific star formation rate (sSFR) relation of HR5 cluster galaxies at z = 0.625, 1, and 1.8 (from left to right). Dots: cluster galaxies with color showing their morphology at a given time. Colored steps at the rightmost panel: histograms of the sSFR of cluster galaxies at different epochs. Black dots and dashed steps: cluster galaxies whose star formation rate (SFR) is marked as zero because of the resolution limit of star particles. We apply uniformly random values of SFR between 0 and the minimum nonzero value from the simulation only for this plot. Dashed line: sSFR = 0.05 Gyr−1, which we use to distinguish active and passive galaxies in this paper.
Paper: Emergence of the Galaxy Morphology–Star Formation Activity–Clustercentric Radius Relations in Galaxy Clusters
Authors: Sungwook E. Hong, Changbom Park, Preetish K. Mishra, Juhan Kim, Brad K. Gibson, Yonghwi Kim, C. Gareth Few, Christophe Pichon, Jihye Shin, Jaehyun Lee
Figure caption: Relation between the local galaxy number density measured by 20 nearest neighbors (ρ 20) and the normalized clustercentric radius for HR5 galaxies at z = 0.625, 0.8, and 1 (from left to right). Each dot corresponds to a single HR5 galaxy with M * > 5 × 109 M ⊙ at a given redshift. Top: The size and color indicate the stellar mass. Middle: Contours of the fraction of spheroid galaxies (f sph) are overlaid. Bottom: Same as middle, except for a fraction of early-type galaxies (f ETG).