CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations

Tidal Features at 0.05 < z < 0.45 in the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program: Properties and Formation Channels

Open access
Kado-Fong, E., Greene, J. E., Hendel, D., Price-Whelan, A. M., Greco, J. P., Goulding, A. D., Huang, S., Johnston, K. V. +5 more·2018·The Astrophysical Journal
DOI 10.3847/1538-4357/aae0f0
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We present 1201 galaxies at 0.05 < z < 0.45 that host tidal features in the first ∼200 deg 2 of imaging from the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program (HSC-SSP). We select these galaxies from a sample of 21,208 galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts drawn from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) spectroscopic campaigns. Of these galaxies, we identify 214 shell systems and 987 stream systems. For 575 of these systems, we are additionally able to measure the (g−i) colors of the tidal features. We find evidence for star formation in a subset of the streams, with the exception of streams around massive ellipticals, and find that stream host galaxies span the full range of stellar masses in our sample. Galaxies that host shells are predominantly red and massive: we find that observable shells form more frequently around ellipticals than around disk galaxies of the same stellar mass. Although the majority of the shells in our sample are consistent with being formed by minor mergers, 15% ± 4.4% of shell host galaxies have (g−i) colors as red as their host galaxy, consistent with being formed by major mergers. These “red shell” galaxies are preferentially aligned with the major axis of the host galaxy, as previously predicted from simulations. We suggest that although the bulk of the observable shell population originates from fairly minor mergers, which preferentially form shells that are not aligned with the major axis of the galaxy, major mergers produce a significant number of observable shells.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3847/1538-4357/aae0f0

Cites

129 of 129 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 tendency of high classifier scores for brighter, larger, lower redshift galaxies is likely not entirely due to bias within the model, since tidal features are more likely to be visible for brighter, larger, lower redshift galaxies.

    “This is likely not entirely due to bias within the model, since tidal features are more likely to be visible for brighter, larger, lower redshift galaxies (e.g. Kado-Fong et al. 2018; Martin et al. 2022)”

    From Detecting galaxy tidal features using self-supervised representation learning (2024) · cites this paper as Kado-Fong et al. 2018

    Section 4.1 reports that observed tidal-feature fractions fall as redshift increases or host stellar mass decreases, and Section 3.4 says detection depends strongly on a feature’s apparent size and surface brightness. These findings support the visibility explanation, but the paper does not directly establish that features are more visible specifically around brighter, larger host galaxies. The statement about the citing paper’s classifier is its own inference, not a finding attributed to Kado-Fong et al. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 130 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Huang, S., Leauthaud, A., Greene, J., et al. 2018a, arXiv:1803.02824 · arXiv
  2. Paudel, S., Smith, R., Yoo, S. J., Calderón-Castillo, P., & Duc, P.-A. 2018, arXiv:1807.07195 · arXiv
  3. Prieur, J.-L. 1990, in Int. Conf. on Dynamics and Interactions of Galaxies, ed. R. Wielen (Heidelberg: Zentrum für Astronomie), 72
  4. The Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sipócz, B. M., et al. 2018, arXiv:1801.02634 · arXiv
  5. B. M. Tinsley & R. B. Larson (New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press), 401

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kado-Fong, E., Greene, J. E., Hendel, D., Price-Whelan, A. M., Greco, J. P., Goulding, A. D., Huang, S., Johnston, K. V., Komiyama, Y., Lee, C.-H., Lust, N. B., Strauss, M. A., & Tanaka, M.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (JP)
  • The Graduate University for Advanced Studies, SOKENDAI (JP)
  • National Astronomical Observatory of Japan (JP)
ORCID
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Publisher
American Astronomical Society
Published
2018-10-17
Volume
866
Issue
2
Pages
103
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
DOI
10.3847/1538-4357/aae0f0
OpenAlex
W2804223110
Cited by
69
References
130
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1614743, 1238877, 1613744)
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • Yale University
  • Vanderbilt University
  • Princeton University
  • Ohio State University
  • Harvard University
  • University of Washington
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Carnegie Mellon University
  • University of Portsmouth
  • New Mexico State University
  • York University
  • Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
  • Cabinet Office, Government of Japan
  • National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
  • Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem
  • Toray Science Foundation
  • Office of Science
  • College of Engineering, Michigan State University
  • Science Mission Directorate
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  • Japan Science and Technology Agency
  • Planetary Science Division
  • Brookhaven National Laboratory
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
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
tidal features, tidal currents, galaxy mergers, minor mergers, major mergers, galaxy color, elliptical galaxies, disk galaxies, stellar mass, galaxy alignment, Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program, intermediate-redshift galaxies

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