Paper detail

The Carnegie-Irvine Galaxy Survey. IX. Classification of Bulge Types and Statistical Properties of Pseudo Bulges

We study the statistical properties of 320 bulges of disk galaxies in the Carnegie-Irvine Galaxy Survey, using robust structural parameters of galaxies derived from image fitting. We apply the Kormendy relation to classify classical and pseudo bulges and characterize bulge dichotomy with respect to bulge structural properties and physical properties of host galaxies. We confirm previous findings that pseudo bulges on average have smaller Sérsic indices, smaller bulge-to-total ratios, and fainter surface brightnesses when compared with classical bulges. Our sizable sample statistically shows that pseudo bulges are more intrinsically flattened than classical bulges. Pseudo bulges are most frequent (incidence $\gtrsim 80\%$) in late-type spirals (later than Sc). Our measurements support the picture in which pseudo bulges arose from star formation induced by inflowing gas, while classical bulges were born out of violent processes such as mergers and coalescence of clumps. We reveal differences with the literature that warrant attention: (1) the bimodal distribution of Sérsic indices presented by previous studies is not reproduced in our study; (2) classical and pseudo bulges have similar relative bulge sizes; and (3) the pseudo bulge fraction is considerably smaller in early-type disks compared with previous studies based on one-dimensional surface brightness profile fitting. We attribute the above differences to our improved image quality, more robust bulge-to-disk decomposition technique, and different classification criteria applied. Moreover, we find that barred galaxies do not host more pseudo bulges or more prominent pseudo bulges than unbarred galaxies. Various implications of these findings are discussed.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.