The Andromeda galaxy’s most important merger about 2 billion years ago as M32’s likely progenitor
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The southern half of the M31 disk appears to be more perturbed by its merger history than the northern half.
“Whether due specifically to M32 or otherwise, the southern half of the M31 disk appears to be more perturbed by its merger history than the northern half (Gordon et al. 2006; D'Souza & Bell 2018; Hammer et al. 2018).”
From The Panchromatic Hubble Andromeda Southern Treasury (PHAST). II. The Spatially Resolved Recent Star Formation History in M31 (2026) · cites this paper as D'Souza & Bell 2018
The discussion on p. 5 says the major merger may have thickened M31’s disk, supporting a possible merger-related disturbance. It does not compare the southern and northern halves of the disk, so the claimed asymmetry is unsupported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.79)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Brown, T. M., Smith, E., Ferguson, H. C., Rich, R. M., Guhathakurta, P., Renzini, A., Sweigart, A. V., & Kimble, R. A. (2006) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/508015 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lazzarini, M., Williams, B. F., Durbin, M. J., Dalcanton, J. J., Smercina, A., Bell, E. F., Choi, Y., Dolphin, A., Gilbert, K., Guhathakurta, P., et al. (2022) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7568 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationWainer, T. M., Williams, B. F., Chen, Z., Lazzarini, M., Dalcanton, J. J., Bell, E. F., Goold, K., Dolphin, A., Durbin, M. J., Dubón, S. L. F., et al. (2026) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae6db9
“…helped establish how long-lived the 10 kpc ring is, and that the PHAT region in M31 had a modest burst of star formation ∼ 100 Myr ago, in addition to the large burst seen ∼ 2 Gyr ago (Williams et al. 2014) most likely in the aftermath of a recent merger (D’Souza & Bell 2018; Hammer et al. 2018).”
Self-citation
- Authors
- D’Souza, R., & Bell, E. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- D’Souza, Richard
- ORCID
- D’Souza, Richard
- Venue
- Nature Astronomy
- Published
- 2018-07-23
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 737-743
- ISSN
- 2397-3366 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2883871226
- Cited by
- 145
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 5
- FWCI
- 6.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Astronomy (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations
- Keywords
- M31, M32, galaxy mergers, stellar halo, tidal debris, stellar streams, starburst, metal-rich stars, Local Group, galaxy formation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
