Beating Confusion with Simultaneous Stacking Marco Viero - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
beating confusion with simultaneous stacking
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Beating Confusion with Simultaneous Stacking Marco Viero - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 19, 2022 240 likes •634 views

Optical v. Infrared Background Half the emission is tied up in dust ad Beating Confusion with Simultaneous Stacking Marco Viero KIPAC/Stanford w/ Lorenzo Moncelsi (Caltech), Ryan Quadri (Texas A&M), Jason Sun (Caltech), and

slide-1
SLIDE 1

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Optical v. Infrared Background

  • Half the emission is tied up in dust

➡ad

1

Beating Confusion with Simultaneous Stacking

Marco Viero — KIPAC/Stanford

w/ Lorenzo Moncelsi (Caltech), Ryan Quadri (Texas A&M), Jason Sun (Caltech), and the HerMES Collaboration

slide-2
SLIDE 2

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

  • How do we reconcile COB and CIB?
  • Want to know:

➡which galaxies make up CIB? ➡how much of the CIB is accounted for? ➡what limits does this place on models?

Motivation

2

M

da Cunha+2010 Dole+2006

COB CIB

1000 10 0.1 Wavelength (μm) nW m2 sr-1 0.1 100 10 1

  • Infrared/Submillimeter emission

reprocessed starlight by dust

  • IR/Submm traces star formation
  • Half the emission is tied up in dust
slide-3
SLIDE 3

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Herschel/SPIRE

  • < 1% of sources resolved at

5σ due to source confusion

  • Strength is surveys, with

~1000 deg2 observed

3

1arcmin

250 μm: 18” 350 μm: 25” 500 μm: 36”

PSF size (FWHM)

d 250μm contours

24.0 mJy 27.5 mJy 30.5 mJy

Confusion Limit (5σ) 3.5 M Primary Band

slide-4
SLIDE 4

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: Synthetic Intensity Fitting Algorithm

4

× C1 × C2 × CN

+ + +

≈

sky map

  • sub-catalog 1

sub-catalog 2 sub-catalog N ➜ ➜ ➜ Formalism developed w/ Lorenzo Moncelsi (Caltech)

SIMSTACK code publicly available (see arXiv:1304.0446): IDL (old) — https://web.stanford.edu/~viero/downloads.html Python (under development!) — https://github.com/marcoviero/simstack

slide-5
SLIDE 5

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Aside: Correlated vs. Uncorrelated Emission

  • Uncorrelated

emission does not bias result,

  • nly increases

noise

5

10,000 iterations

no bias

slide-6
SLIDE 6

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Aside: Correlated vs. Uncorrelated Emission

  • Correlated

emission does bias the result, and more with increasing beam

6

Source Density (arcmin-2) Sstacked/Sinput

no bias

slide-7
SLIDE 7

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Aside: Correlated vs. Uncorrelated Emission

  • Correlated

emission does bias the result, and more with increasing beam

6

Source Density (arcmin-2) Sstacked/Sinput

no bias

slide-8
SLIDE 8

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: Flux Densities (M,z)

7

slide-9
SLIDE 9

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: Flux Densities (M,z)

7

slide-10
SLIDE 10

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: Flux Densities (M,z)

8

Flux Density [mJy]

Wavelength [μm]

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri+ (2013) arXiv:1304.0446

slide-11
SLIDE 11

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

stellar mass slices redshift slices SIMSTACK: SEDs

9

slide-12
SLIDE 12

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

stellar mass slices redshift slices

10

{

SIMSTACK: LIR(M,z)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

CIB Breakdown

11

~70% at SPIRE wavelengths

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2013) arXiv:1304.0446

slide-14
SLIDE 14

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

CIB Breakdown

11

~70% at SPIRE wavelengths

Split Sample by:

  • redshift
  • stellar mass

log(M/M⊙~10-11) i.e., M ≲ M* z = 0-2 @ < 200um z = >1 @ > 200um

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2013) arXiv:1304.0446

slide-15
SLIDE 15

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

CIB Breakdown

11

~70% at SPIRE wavelengths

Split Sample by:

  • redshift
  • stellar mass

log(M/M⊙~10-11) i.e., M ≲ M* z = 0-2 @ < 200um z = >1 @ > 200um

ULIRGS LIRGS Normal

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2013) arXiv:1304.0446

slide-16
SLIDE 16

So, 70% of CIB resolved… what about the rest?

12

slide-17
SLIDE 17

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

13

Source in Catalog Source not in Catalog Imagine this is a SKY MAP

slide-18
SLIDE 18

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

14

Source in Catalog Source not in Catalog

Unbiased if :

  • beam is small

make synthetic “hits” map from positions of sources in catalog fit “synthetic” map to the map of the sky

slide-19
SLIDE 19

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

15

Source in Catalog Source not in Catalog

make synthetic “hits” map from positions of sources in catalog fit “synthetic” map to the map of the sky Biased if :

  • beam is big
  • missing a lot of sources
slide-20
SLIDE 20

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

COBE: Fixsen 1998

slide-21
SLIDE 21

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

Smooth with bigger beam

COBE: Fixsen 1998

  • x-axis increasing beam
slide-22
SLIDE 22

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

Smooth with bigger beam

COBE: Fixsen 1998

  • x-axis increasing beam
  • y-axis cumulative Intensity below z
slide-23
SLIDE 23

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

Smooth with bigger beam

COBE: Fixsen 1998

  • x-axis increasing beam
  • y-axis cumulative Intensity below z
  • FIRAS Direct measurement ~30% errors
slide-24
SLIDE 24

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

Smooth with bigger beam

COBE: Fixsen 1998 NULL TESTS

  • x-axis increasing beam
  • y-axis cumulative Intensity below z
  • FIRAS Direct measurement ~30% errors
  • Null tests on random positions
slide-25
SLIDE 25

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

Smooth with bigger beam

COBE: Fixsen 1998 NULL TESTS

  • x-axis increasing beam
  • y-axis cumulative Intensity below z
  • FIRAS Direct measurement ~30% errors
  • Null tests on random positions
  • Flat because Catalog is ~100% complete

to log(M/Msun) = 9 - 11.5

slide-26
SLIDE 26

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

A New Accounting of the CIB

16

Smooth with bigger beam

COBE: Fixsen 1998 NULL TESTS

  • x-axis increasing beam
  • y-axis cumulative Intensity below z
  • FIRAS Direct measurement ~30% errors
  • Null tests on random positions
  • Flat because Catalog is ~100% complete

to log(M/Msun) = 9 - 11.5

  • Nearly all of the CIB is accounted for by

emission correlated with known, cataloged, galaxies. But is it necessarily

  • riginating from galaxies?
slide-27
SLIDE 27

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

17

  • Parametric fit to the (nominally) stacked flux densities (dashed lines)
  • Parametric fit to the stellar mass functions from Leja et al. 2014 (solid lines)

Stellar Mass Functions Submillimeter Flux Densities

slide-28
SLIDE 28

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

18

  • Circles/Solid lines: Model compared to total CIB after smoothing to 300

arcsec FWHM.

arcsec

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

slide-29
SLIDE 29

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

18

  • Circles/Solid lines: Model compared to total CIB after smoothing to 300

arcsec FWHM.

arcsec

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2015) arXiv:1505.06242

slide-30
SLIDE 30

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB

19

  • Most of the CIB comes from galaxies between log(M/Msun)=8.5 - 11.5
  • Black line/shaded region is the incompleteness of the catalog

catalog incomplete

Stellar Mass

log(M/M)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

➡Low-Mass end of the Stellar mass function

  • Any stellar mass model cannot have to many/few IR emitters

➡Star-Formation Rate Density (to z = 4 for now)

  • Limits on total obscured star formation

The total CIB places limits on, e.g.,:

20

slide-32
SLIDE 32

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

A New Accounting of the CIB: Summary

  • Current Estimates of the total CIB can be explained by known

galaxies, and their correlated companions, at z < 4

21

  • This technique is

not limited to submillimeter maps

  • r CIB studies

➡as we push to

higher redshifts, intensities will be powerful probes of first galaxies, which will be faint, numerous, and highly correlated

Viero, Moncelsi et al. (2016) — arXiv:1505.06242

slide-33
SLIDE 33

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: coming full circle

22

Viero, Moncelsi, Quadri et al. (2013) arXiv:1304.0446

Flux RA DEC 41.4 149.853 2.608 3.5 149.854 2.258 4.4 149.752 2.584 16.7 149.832 2.724 22.5 149.275 2.196 3.6 149.262 2.966 5.8 149.915 2.206 3.1 149.546 2.564 2.3 149.824 2.047 4.0 149.453 2.278 2.1 149.863 2.788 … … …

slide-34
SLIDE 34

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: coming full circle

23

Flux RA DEC 41.4 149.853 2.608 3.5 149.854 2.258 4.4 149.752 2.584 16.7 149.832 2.724 22.5 149.275 2.196 3.6 149.262 2.966 5.8 149.915 2.206 3.1 149.546 2.564 2.3 149.824 2.047 4.0 149.453 2.278 2.1 149.863 2.788 … … …

slide-35
SLIDE 35

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

SIMSTACK: coming full circle

23

Flux RA DEC 41.4 149.853 2.608 3.5 149.854 2.258 4.4 149.752 2.584 16.7 149.832 2.724 22.5 149.275 2.196 3.6 149.262 2.966 5.8 149.915 2.206 3.1 149.546 2.564 2.3 149.824 2.047 4.0 149.453 2.278 2.1 149.863 2.788 … … …

slide-36
SLIDE 36

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

24

FLUCTFIT: Preview

  • Instead of average

flux of simulated images

➡Fit parameters of

the model to each

  • bject
slide-37
SLIDE 37

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

FLUCTFIT: Preview

25

slide-38
SLIDE 38

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

FLUCTFIT: Preview

25

slide-39
SLIDE 39

marco.viero@stanford.edu CSST Weekly Meeting — April 26 2016

Summary

  • Current Estimates of the total CIB can be explained by known

galaxies, and their correlated companions, at z < 4

  • SIMSTACK works

➡splitting up of sample needs improving. ➡ALMA observations should provide useful priors for more

sophisticated algorithms.

  • Emission from galaxies predicted by the stellar mass function can

account for the entire CIB

  • This technique is not limited to submillimeter maps or CIB studies

➡as we push to higher redshifts, intensities will be powerful probes of

first galaxies, which will be faint, numerous, and highly correlated

  • Absolute CIB level is important, and needs to be improved (might

require a dedicated instrument)

26