& Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall...

18
& Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’
  • date post

    20-Dec-2015
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    218
  • download

    0

Transcript of & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall...

Page 1: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

&

Photometric Redshiftswith Poisson Noise

Christian Wolf

Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall

Kernel regression‘correct error’

Page 2: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

z/(1+z) ~ 0.006

λ / nm

QE (

%)

5 Mpc

5 M

pc

Principal Dataset:COMBO-17 + Spitzer + HST

Page 3: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

I. Declining Star Formation

• COMBO-17 covered redshift 0..1

• Mapped luminosity evolution of galaxy population

• Build-up of stellar mass in red sequence

• COMBO-17 photo-z and spectroscopic surveys get identical results

• SF decline *not* driven by mergers(Wolf et al. 2005)

Hopkins et al. 2006

Faber, Willmer, Wolf et al. 2007Bell, Wolf et al. 2004Wolf et al. 2003

Page 4: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Declining Star Formation with Density

• COMBO-17 studied A901ab/902 (z=0.17)

• Dusty red galaxies = red spirals,see transformation in action, ongoing SF across the “gap”

• Slow quenching of star formation, *not* driven by mergers or starburst

Hopkins et al. 2006S0

SpE

frag

Koo

pm

ann

& K

en

ney

20

04K

enn

ey

et a

l. 2

008

Wolf et al. 2005, 2009& press release 2008

Page 5: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Old Red & Dusty Red Galaxies

Page 6: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Aspects of Transformation

Type Blue spiral Red spiral S0 galaxy

SFR-(280-U)rest

clumpiness

(U-V)rest

EB-V stars

EB-V SF

Examples

Page 7: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Physics of Star Formation Decline?

• Discussed origins of SF decline– Merger-triggered starbursts & exhaustion– Ram-pressure stripping of cold gas– Starvation of cold gas supply– Tidal effects from cluster potential– Galaxy-galaxy interactions– Gravitational heating in structure formation*

• Approaches– Detailed physical models challenging– Need better account of what’s there

• Are S0s made from present spirals?– Disk fading, light profiles, central SF– Outside-in truncation of SF disk,

dependence on cluster?– Cluster infall time scales from SFH

templates in fossil records

• Trends with redshift?– Higher-redshift clusters in comparison– Expect inversion of SF-density relation…

• Future observations– H imaging of A901/2 (OSIRIS via ESO)– Colour gradients in SDSS group galaxies– AO-assisted IFU study of intermediate-z

galaxies (SWIFT@Palomar)– Analysis of HIROCS clusters z~0.6 to 1.6

• Long-term approaches– AO & MCAO-assisted line imaging and

IFU spectroscopy of z~1..2 clusters (ESO VLT: MUSE & post-MAD devices)

– HST-based line imaging with WF3 NIR (J-band) narrow-bands of z~1 clusters

Page 8: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

II. Photometric Redshifts and Classification

• COMBO-17– Many narrow bands– Template-based classification

Classes galaxy, star, qso, wd Reaches z/(1+z) < 0.01

Accurate rest-frame SED(and old red : dusty red)

λ / nm

QE (

%)

Wolf 2001

rms 0.008 7%-20%

outlier

rms 0.006

Page 9: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Abd

alla

et a

l. 20

07

Photometric Redshifts 2010+

• Trends– Before CADIS & COMBO-17

little science published from photo-z (only “experimentation”)

– Scientific value demonstrated!– Now: Strong drive towards

huge / all-sky surveys:• Dark Energy Survey,

PanStarrs

• VST, VISTA, LSST, IDEM …

– Beat Poissonnoise…

– But: impact of systematics?!

• Applications– Extremely large stand-alone

photo-z surveys– Search for interesting

spectroscopic targets

• To learn about– Cosmology & dark energy via

BAO and gravitational lensing– Galaxy growth embedded in

dark matter haloes– Galaxy evolution over time and

with environment– New phenomena

Page 10: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

The Two Ways of Photo-”Z”eeing

• Model input: – Educated guesses– I.e. template SEDs and for

priors evolving luminosity functions etc.

• Photo-z output: – Educated guesses*– “What could be there? What is

it probably not?”

• Needed for– Pioneering new frontier: depth

in magnitude or z beyond spectroscopic reach

• Model input: – Statistical Distributions– I.e. empirically measured n(z)

distributions for all locations in flux space

• Photo-z output: – Statistical Distributions– “What is there? And in which

proportions?”

• Needed for– Extrapolating to wide area:

known mag/z territory with spectroscopic description

*You will never obtain a reliable estimate of an n(z) distribution from a technique that involves more than zero pieces of information which do not represent a true distribution but a best-guess approximation instead…

Page 11: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

The Two Ways of Photo-”Z”eeing

• Model input: – Educated guesses– I.e. template SEDs and for

priors evolving luminosity functions etc.

• Photo-z output: – Educated guesses*– “What could be there? What is

it probably not?”

• Needed for– Pioneering new frontier: depth

in magnitude or z beyond spectroscopic reach

• Model input: – Statistical Distributions– I.e. empirically measured n(z)

distributions for all locations in flux space

• Photo-z output: – Statistical Distributions– “What is there? And in which

proportions?”

• Needed for– Extrapolating to wide area:

known mag/z territory with spectroscopic description

*You will never obtain a reliable estimate of an n(z) distribution from a technique that involves more than zero pieces of information which do not represent a true distribution but a best-guess approximation instead…

• Work continues on– Best templates– Best luminosity functions– Best code debugging– An engineering problem

taken care of by PHAT

• Work continues on – How to get n(z) correctly in

presence of errors?

• Problem solved:– Wolf (2009), MN in press– n(z) with Poisson-only errors

Page 12: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Kernel regression‘added error’

Kernel regression‘correct error’

ANNz Template fitting

Reconstruction of Redshift Distributionsfrom ugriz-Photometry of QSOs

Left panel: The n(z) of a QSO sample is reconstructed with errors of 1.08 Poisson noise(works with any subsample or individual objects as well) using “2-testing with noisy models”

Page 13: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

State of the Art vs. Opportunity

• Current methods– Precision sufficient for pre-2010

science– But insufficient and critical for

the next decade

• Current surveys– VVDS and DEEP-2: 20%..50%

incomplete at 22..24 mag– SDSS (bright survey) 3…4%?

• Propagates into bias non-recov=0.2 (20% incomplete)

|z|=0.2 ! and w ~ 1 !

• Poisson-precision results need Adoption of Wolf 2009 method

removes methodical limitations Complete(!) “training set”

removes data limitations– Incompleteness systematics

• Issues – Lines in the NIR, weak lines at

low metallicity, what else?– Goal 1..5% incompleteness– Provide sub-samples with <1%

incompleteness– Fundamental limits? Blending?

Page 14: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Vision: The PRATER Project

“Photometric Redshift Archive for Training External Resources”

– Gaussian-precision photo-z code & residual risk quantification from model incompleteness/size moves all attention to model

– Residual outlier risk incomplete

– Noise floor on n(z) 2n(z) 1/Nmodel,z-bin

– Best model is (i) most complete and (ii) largest

Build: a world reference repository for post-2010 photo-zeeing

– Best-possible photo-z quality by design (method, completeness, size)

– Quality limits understood and communicated quantitatively

– Dynamic and growing with time

– Customers submit small “photo-zeeing” jobs over the web or ask for mirror installation in large applications (e.g. PanStarrs)

Page 15: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

How to Make It Happen

• Collaboration with critical mass, expertise & telescope access

– O. LeFevre, Marseille (VIMOS)– J. Newman, S. Cruz (DEEP-2)– T. Shanks, Durham (XMS)– P. Prada, Granada (SIDE/GTC)– G. Dalton, Oxford (FMOS)

• Clarify incompleteness sources

• Coordinate multi-instrument plan to gather required data

– VIMOS upgrade at ESO-VLT– FMOS (NIR) at Subaru 2010– XMS at Calar Alto 2015?– SIDE at GTC 2015?

• First demonstrator:– Using zCOSMOS for SDSS

• 5-year goal:– Ingest best-possible VIMOS &

FMOS completeness– Perfect performance to 23 mag

• Drive next-gen instrumentation– Supported by ESA/ESO Report

on Fundamental Cosmology– Dark Energy Task Force (U.S.)

• 10-year goal:– Reach as deep as possible with

newest spectrographs, possibly space-based post-2020 (IDEM)

Page 16: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Summary

I. Cosmic decline in star formation• Over time and environment: not(!) driven by major mergers

• Star formation fading in cluster infall makes S0-like galaxies

• Interplay of fading process with structure formation…???

II. Photo-z’s or n(z|c) for future surveys • Method devised for Poisson-precision results (if model complete)

• Completeness of deep spectroscopy is primary quality limit

• Window of opportunity: PRATER project as world reference

• Community concerned and supportive, considering instrumentation

III. Stellar explosions• …see avalanche in available data, but follow-up and interpretation?

• Dark energy from SNe Ia: extinction correction dubious, metallicity?

Page 17: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

III. Stellar Explosions

• Host galaxies SNe II : L-GRBs– If GRB Z* cut-off, then solar

• Cosmic SFR : SNR history– SN Ia delay time 0-4 Gyr

• Archival event search– GALEX UV flash before SN II

red giant progenitor– Radio: BBC, SWR, …

Page 18: & Photometric Redshifts with Poisson Noise Christian Wolf Quenching Star Formation in Cluster Infall Kernel regression ‘correct error’

Stellar Explosions: Work 2010+

• Ages & Z* of SN subtypes

– Links to progenitor evolution

– Galaxy proxy, residual trend

• SN Ia light curves: 3-p family– Host galaxy age, dust & Z*?

– Cosmic calibration drift?

• Early light curves & flashes– Stacking, short cadence, SDSS,

PTF, SkyMapper, Calan 2010+

– Explosion conditions

Con

ley

et a

l. 20

08

Hamuy et al. 1993/5