diff --git "a/batch_s000035.csv" "b/batch_s000035.csv" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/batch_s000035.csv" @@ -0,0 +1,10357 @@ +source,target + The most notable difference is related to dust which does uot affect the NIR images., The most notable difference is related to dust which does not affect the NIR images. + Tidal tails and bridges seen as frequent in the NIR as in the optical, Tidal tails and bridges seem as frequent in the NIR as in the optical. + Ilowever. we do observe a higher fraction of asvuunetric galaxies iu the NIR than iu the optical for the UCCs.," However, we do observe a higher fraction of asymmetric galaxies in the NIR than in the optical for the HCGs." + Since we are not secius this effect iu the IKPGs. this clearly states that something is different in the IICCs.," Since we are not seeing this effect in the KPGs, this clearly states that something is different in the HCGs." + Possibly the interactions in the IICCis are at a amore advanced stage and are affecting the oldest stellar population., Possibly the interactions in the HCGs are at a more advanced stage and are affecting the oldest stellar population. + Or possibly. interactions aro now occurring d the absence of the usual evidences of star formation or nuclear activity.," Or possibly, interactions are now occurring in the absence of the usual evidences of star formation or nuclear activity." + This last possibility is consistent with the dry merger hypothesis., This last possibility is consistent with the dry merger hypothesis. + Tu normal early-type galaxies. color evadicuts make a galaxy core redder than the periphery (ic.. the eradient. is. negative:. Peleticr. οἳ αἱ.," In normal early-type galaxies, color gradients make a galaxy core redder than the periphery (i.e. the gradient is negative; Peletier et al." + 1990)., 1990). + These color gradieuts can be explained. in part by the concentration of older stellar population towards the ceuter of the galaxies. and in other part. by an increase in stellar metallicity (IIlinklev&Tin32001).," These color gradients can be explained, in part by the concentration of older stellar population towards the center of the galaxies, and in other part, by an increase in stellar metallicity \citep{hinkley01}." +.. Galaxy formation models Sugeest that if au elliptical galaxy form rapidly lw monolithic collapse aud is undisturbed ly interaction. a negative color gradients will form aud stay uuchaneed for most of its life-time.," Galaxy formation models suggest that if an elliptical galaxy form rapidly by monolithic collapse and is undisturbed by interaction, a negative color gradients will form and stay unchanged for most of its life-time." + However. some elliptical galaxies are known to present color gradients which are flat or positive. ie. bluer to the iuney part (Aichard1999:huctal.2001:Yanget 2006).," However, some elliptical galaxies are known to present color gradients which are flat or positive, i.e., bluer to the inner part \citep{michard99, im01, yang06}." + For these ealaxies. nmodels sugeest that such features in color eradieuts cau be the result of mergers or past interactions with σαςτο] galaxies.," For these galaxies, models suggest that such features in color gradients can be the result of mergers or past interactions with gas-rich galaxies." + As in Coziol αποπιΕναν (2007). we have search for NIR blue cores iu the early-type galaxies of our sunuple.," As in Coziol Plauchu-Frayn (2007), we have search for NIR blue cores in the early-type galaxies of our sample." + The JA’ color gradieut is defined as δουν)., The $J - K'$ color gradient is defined as $\Delta (J-K')/log(r)$. + According to this definition. ealaxies with blue cores have ACFA)flog(r)samples- 0.," According to this definition, galaxies with blue cores have $\Delta (J-K')/log(r)<0$ ." + For 29 early-type galaxies in the three we were able to estimate this gradient., For 29 early-type galaxies in the three samples we were able to estimate this gradient. +" In these ealaxies we found colors consistent withblue cores or flat gradieuts in 10 out of 22 (15%)) Πο» aud bout of £()) τέως,", In these galaxies we found colors consistent with blue cores or flat gradients in 10 out of 22 ) HCGs and 4 out of 6 ) KPGs. + The oulv carly-type, The only early-type +"also took into account the measurement by ?.272+10rad/m- From this set of five measurements we derived an RM of 255.01£0.83 rad/nv"".",also took into account the measurement by \citet[][$272\pm10$ $\mathrm{rad/m^2}$ From this set of five measurements we derived an RM of $255.01 \pm 0.83$ $\mathrm{rad/m^2}$. +" It should be clear that. with regard to the 350 MHz RM measurements. the fits give the same reduced y for both the positive and the negative correction to the initial ""derotation""."," It should be clear that, with regard to the 350 MHz RM measurements, the fits give the same reduced $\chi^2$ for both the positive and the negative correction to the initial ""derotation""." + We removed those ambiguities by considering the Stokes U measurements near 850 MHz data on 2005 January 5., We removed those ambiguities by considering the Stokes U measurements near 850 MHz data on 2005 January 5. + The fit to that data gave an RM of 253.14+12.43 rad/m which made all of the positive RM solutions to the 350 MHz data very unlikely (=3.0c level for January 4 and 7)., The fit to that data gave an RM of $253.14\pm12.43$ $\mathrm{rad/m^2}$ which made all of the positive RM solutions to the 350 MHz data very unlikely $\simeq 3.0 \sigma$ level for January 4 and 7). + It is evident that the contribution of the ionosphere to the RM. RA; Is included in all fits.," It is evident that the contribution of the ionosphere to the RM, $\mathrm{RM_{ion}}$, is included in all fits." +" For the 2005 January 4. 5. 7 and 10 observations. RM;,, as reported by the AIPS task ""TECOR'. is the range 2.]+04 rad/m-."," For the 2005 January 4, 5, 7 and 10 observations, $\mathrm{RM_{ion}}$ as reported by the AIPS task 'TECOR', is the range $2.1\pm 0.4$ $\mathrm{rad/m^2}$." + Consequently. the interstellar RM is given. by RMin=255.01-2.1252.91€0.92 rad/im-.," Consequently, the interstellar RM is given by $\mathrm{RM_{int}}=255.01-2.1=252.91 \pm 0.92$ $\mathrm{rad/m^2}$." + We were able to measure the fractional linear. polarization on all of the four epochs mentioned in paragraph 3.2.1..., We were able to measure the fractional linear polarization on all of the four epochs mentioned in paragraph \ref{par:polgeneral}. + At 850 MHz. we were not able to measure polarization on. 2005 January 10.," At 850 MHz, we were not able to measure polarization on 2005 January 10." + For the other occasions. the measured polarized fluxes. P=4Q?-U2. fractions and their error bars are listed in table 4..," For the other occasions, the measured polarized fluxes, $P=\sqrt{Q^2+U^2}$, fractions and their error bars are listed in table \ref{tab:linpolfrac}." + The latter two quantities are depicted in figure 3.., The latter two quantities are depicted in figure \ref{fig:linpolfracs}. + The overall conclusion is that there is no compelling evidence for any significant depolarization at any frequency., The overall conclusion is that there is no compelling evidence for any significant depolarization at any frequency. + Only the polarization fraction at 1300 MHz on January 4 is low compared to the 8.4 GHz measurements. but this fraction was determined from our worst fit. Le.. the fit with the highest reduced y. The polarization angles and their uncertainties are. also listed in table 4..," Only the polarization fraction at 1300 MHz on January 4 is low compared to the 8.4 GHz measurements, but this fraction was determined from our worst fit, i.e., the fit with the highest reduced $\chi^2$ The polarization angles and their uncertainties are also listed in table \ref{tab:linpolfrac}. ." + The observations at 550 and 1300 MHz gave the most accurate position angles. with typical uncertainties of order 10°.," The observations at 850 and 1300 MHz gave the most accurate position angles, with typical uncertainties of order $10\degr$." + They are depicted in figure 4.., They are depicted in figure \ref{fig:polangles}. + Here. we see compelling evidence for significantly. different. polarization angles with respect to the 8.4 GHz observations from ?.. particularly on January 5 and 850 MHz and on January 10 at both 850 and 1300 MHz.," Here, we see compelling evidence for significantly different polarization angles with respect to the 8.4 GHz observations from \citet{Taylor2005}, particularly on January 5 and 850 MHz and on January 10 at both 850 and 1300 MHz." + It is clear from figure 1. that SGRI806-20 is much dimmer at 350 MHz than what would be expected from the GMRT observations. at. 240 and 610 MHz (?).., It is clear from figure \ref{fig:fluxPband} that SGR1806-20 is much dimmer at 350 MHz than what would be expected from the GMRT observations at 240 and 610 MHz \citep{Cameron2005}. + In principle the Luminous Blue Variable. 14 to the east of SGR 1806-20 (seetheSupplementaryInformationto?) should be easily distinguishable from the Soft Gamma Repeater in the GMRT images. even at 240 MHz.," In principle the Luminous Blue Variable, $14\arcsec$ to the east of SGR 1806-20 \citep[see the Supplementary Information to][]{Gaensler2005a} should be easily distinguishable from the Soft Gamma Repeater in the GMRT images, even at 240 MHz." + The FWHM beamsize reported at that frequency is 12”«18 (?).., The FWHM beamsize reported at that frequency is $12\arcsec \times 18\arcsec$ \citep{Chandrab}. + This makes it hard to understand the In principle the discrepancy cannot originate from. the inclusion or exclusion of extended emission., This makes it hard to understand the In principle the discrepancy cannot originate from the inclusion or exclusion of extended emission. + The GMRT data were corrected for this (??)..," The GMRT data were corrected for this \citep{Chandraa,Chandrab}." + We excluded short spacings («κ) from our 350 MHz WSRT observations., We excluded short spacings $< 1\mathrm{k}\lambda$ ) from our 350 MHz WSRT observations. + This was actually a necessity since these were daytime observations and solar interference would otherwise compromise our calibration (seealso?.endofparagraph3.2).., This was actually a necessity since these were daytime observations and solar interference would otherwise compromise our calibration \citep[see also][end of paragraph 3.2]{Brentjens2008}. + Also. it is possible that the LBV radio nebula is variable and that it was much brighter on 2005 April 30/May 1 than on some occasions in 2005 January.," Also, it is possible that the LBV radio nebula is variable and that it was much brighter on 2005 April 30/May 1 than on some occasions in 2005 January." +" We ran the AIPS task ""IMFIT' on the map from our 2005 April 30/May | observation and we found a peak flux density of 138+ImJy/beam and an integrated flux of 189+2mJy/beam at the location of the LBV.", We ran the AIPS task 'IMFIT' on the map from our 2005 April 30/May 1 observation and we found a peak flux density of $138\pm 1 \mathrm{mJy/beam}$ and an integrated flux of $189\pm 2 \mathrm{mJy/beam}$ at the location of the LBV. + The NVSS (?) image of this field shows this source at the 15 mJy level., The NVSS \citep{Condon98} image of this field shows this source at the 15 mJy level. + This would indicate that the LBV has a spectral index of about -1.8. which 1s almost the index for thermal radio radiation.," This would indicate that the LBV has a spectral index of about -1.8, which is almost the index for thermal radio radiation." + It should be noted that. at the times of the latest observations in January 2005. when the radio nebula was relatively dim. there is no evidence for negative residuals in our maps that could be caused by the subtraction of the LBV.," It should be noted that, at the times of the latest observations in January 2005, when the radio nebula was relatively dim, there is no evidence for negative residuals in our maps that could be caused by the subtraction of the LBV." + This indicates that. most likely. the LBV had the same brightness at the times of at least some of the 2005 January measurements as OI 2005 April 30/May 1.," This indicates that, most likely, the LBV had the same brightness at the times of at least some of the 2005 January measurements as on 2005 April 30/May 1." + Variability at radio wavelengths of the radio nebulas from LBVs has been known for quite some time (see.e.g..?)..," Variability at radio wavelengths of the radio nebulas from LBVs has been known for quite some time \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Abbott81}." + For the P Cygni nebula variability at timescales of days was established at em wavelengths (2)., For the P Cygni nebula variability at timescales of days was established at cm wavelengths \citep{Skinner96}. + These authors report a 50% increase in flux in less than two days on one occasion during three months of observations on every other day., These authors report a $50\%$ increase in flux in less than two days on one occasion during three months of observations on every other day. + It 1s unknown how these variations translate to lower frequencies., It is unknown how these variations translate to lower frequencies. + We therefore cannot completely exclude that the LBV was brighter at the time of the 2005 April 30/May | observation than on some occasions in January 2005., We therefore cannot completely exclude that the LBV was brighter at the time of the 2005 April 30/May 1 observation than on some occasions in January 2005. + Also. the spectral index derived above does not agree with any of the spectral indices of the four LBVs observed by ? at 3 and 6 em.," Also, the spectral index derived above does not agree with any of the spectral indices of the four LBVs observed by \citet{Duncan2002} at 3 and 6 cm." + Two of those spectral indices are close to that of a spherically symmetric radially expanding stellar wind (+0.6.see??)..," Two of those spectral indices are close to that of a spherically symmetric radially expanding stellar wind \citep[+0.6, see][]{Panagia75,Wright75}." + However. at these wavelengths. those systems may well be described as optically thin. which may not be the case at the frequencies we are The WSRT 850 MHz Stokes I measurements are not inconsistent. with the 840 MHz MOST data published earlier (?).. given the rather large noise levels in the data from both telescopes.," However, at these wavelengths, those systems may well be described as optically thin, which may not be the case at the frequencies we are The WSRT 850 MHz Stokes I measurements are not inconsistent with the 840 MHz MOST data published earlier \citep{Gaensler2005a}, given the rather large noise levels in the data from both telescopes." + The last MOST observation was taken 15 days after the Giant Flare (GF)., The last MOST observation was taken 15 days after the Giant Flare (GF). + Consequently. the 550 MHz WSRT observations after 2005 January 10 cannot be compared with other observations in this band.," Consequently, the 850 MHz WSRT observations after 2005 January 10 cannot be compared with other observations in this band." + The last three of the January 2005 observations at 850 MHz were less contaminated by RFI than the first four. which resulted insmaller error bars on the fluxes.," The last three of the January 2005 observations at 850 MHz were less contaminated by RFI than the first four, which resulted insmaller error bars on the fluxes." + There is evidence (>2c level) for a deviation from a power-law decay from about 15 days after the GF. analogous," There is evidence $>2\sigma$ level) for a deviation from a power-law decay from about 15 days after the GF, analogous" +Iu he rawe ds«d<20. the color-couuts are known to spli iuto two major peaks. cach sample a different stellar pxopulation (ασ 1986).,"In the range $1812.," As pointed out above this may be due to, and is consistent with, the departure of the color term from the linear correction adopted for objects with $(B-V)>1.2$." + Note tlat he agreement is uuch better in (WVOL) for which t1C οςntribution from color terms are expected to e negligible., Note that the agreement is much better in $(V-I)$ for which the contribution from color terms are expected to be negligible. + Traditionally. the observed spitti negli the color peaks las Deel used to determine tιο local LOLIalization of halo stars in the solar ucighborlood.," Traditionally, the observed splitting in the color peaks has been used to determine the local normalization of halo stars in the solar neighborhood." + Note in this context the difference in the amplitude of the counts iu the blue peal. in tje naeuitude range 202]. WwHeh ds seen iu both (BV) aud (VI).," Note in this context the difference in the amplitude of the counts in the blue peak in the magnitude range $20