Pith. Sign in

RECORD

The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: The clustering of galaxy groups

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Nelson D. Padilla, C. M. Baugh, V. R. Eke, P. Norberg, S. Cole, C. S. Frenk, D. J. Croton, I. K. Baldry
show 22 more authors
J. Bland-Hawthorn, T. Bridges, R. Cannon, M. Colless, C. Collins, W. Couch, G. Dalton, R. De Propris, S. P. Driver, G. Efstathiou, R. S. Ellis, K. Glazebrook, C. Jackson, O. Lahav, I. Lewis, S. Lumsden, S. Maddox, D. Madgwick, J. A. Peacock, B. A. Peterson, W. Sutherland, K. Taylor. (The 2dFGRS team)

Astrophysics · Submitted 25 Feb 2004

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We demonstrate that the 2PIGG results are in very good agreement with the clustering of groups expected in the LCDM model.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDastro-ph/0402577 (version 2)
Pith ID2D73IY6G, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationB. A. Peterson, C. Collins, C. Jackson, C. M. Baugh, C. S. Frenk, D. J. Croton, D. Madgwick, G. Dalton, G. Efstathiou, I. K. Baldry, I. Lewis, J. A. Peacock, J. Bland-Hawthorn, K. Glazebrook, K. Taylor. (The 2dFGRS team), M. Colless, Nelson D. Padilla, O. Lahav, P. Norberg, R. Cannon, R. De Propris, R. S. Ellis, S. Cole, S. Lumsden, S. Maddox, S. P. Driver, T. Bridges, V. R. Eke, W. Couch, W. Sutherland. "The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: The clustering of galaxy groups." arXiv:astro-ph/0402577 (2004). https://pith.science/paper/2D73IY6G
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,566 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.18 · states limitation 0.08 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.48 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.91 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We measure the clustering of galaxy groups in the 2dFGRS Percolation-Inferred Galaxy Group (2PIGG) catalogue. The 2PIGG sample has 29,000 groups with at least two members. The clustering amplitude of the full 2PIGG catalogue is weaker than that of 2dFGRS galaxies, in agreement with theoretical predictions. We have subdivided the 2PIGG catalogue into samples that span a factor of 25 in median total luminosity. Our correlation function measurements span an unprecedented range of clustering strengths, connecting the regimes probed by groups fainter than L* galaxies and rich clusters. There is a steady increase in clustering strength with group luminosity; the most luminous groups are ten times more strongly clustered than the full 2PIGG catalogue. We demonstrate that the 2PIGG results are in very good agreement with the clustering of groups expected in the LCDM model.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We measure the clustering of galaxy groups in the 2dFGRS Percolation-Inferred Galaxy Group (2PIGG) catalogue. contribution 0.99 0.97 0.05 asserted 1.00
s1 The 2PIGG sample has 29,000 groups with at least two members. method 0.67 0.48 0.03 asserted 1.00
s2 The clustering amplitude of the full 2PIGG catalogue is weaker than that of 2dFGRS galaxies, in agreement with theoretical predictions. result 0.94 0.88 0.18 asserted 1.00
s3 We have subdivided the 2PIGG catalogue into samples that span a factor of 25 in median total luminosity. method 0.81 0.94 0.04 asserted 0.99
s4 Our correlation function measurements span an unprecedented range of clustering strengths, connecting the regimes probed by groups fainter than L* galaxies and rich clusters. contribution 0.58 0.95 0.13 asserted 1.00
s5 There is a steady increase in clustering strength with group luminosity; the most luminous groups are ten times more strongly clustered than the full 2PIGG catalogue. result 1.00 0.94 0.49 asserted 1.00
s6 We demonstrate that the 2PIGG results are in very good agreement with the clustering of groups expected in the LCDM model. interpretation 0.60 0.89 0.30 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from analysis of existing data 0.85.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We measure the clustering of galaxy groups in the 2dFGRS Percolation-Inferred Galaxy Group (2PIGG) catalogue. The 2PIGG sample has 29,000 groups with at least two members. The clustering amplitude of the full 2PIGG catalogue is weaker than that of 2dFGRS galaxies, in agreement with theoretical predictions. We have subdivided the 2PIGG catalogue into samples that span a factor of 25 in median total luminosity. Our correlation function measurements span an unprecedented range of clustering strengths, connecting the regimes probed by groups fainter than L* galaxies and rich clusters. There is a steady increase in clustering strength with group luminosity; the most luminous groups are ten times more strongly clustered than the full 2PIGG catalogue. We demonstrate that the 2PIGG results are in very good agreement with the clustering of groups expected in the LCDM model.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

References

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.