4.6 Article

Variability selected high-redshift quasars on SDSS Stripe 82

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 530, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201016254

关键词

quasars: general

资金

  1. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  2. Participating Institutions
  3. National Science Foundation
  4. US Department of Energy
  5. Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR-08-BLAN-0222]
  6. [DE-AC02-98CH10886]
  7. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) [ANR-08-BLAN-0222] Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The SDSS-III BOSS Quasar survey will attempt to observe z > 2.15 quasars at a density of at least 15 per square degree to yield the first measurement of the baryon acoustic oscillations in the Ly-alpha forest. To help reaching this goal, we have developed a method to identify quasars based on their variability in the ugriz optical bands. The method has been applied to the selection of quasar targets in the SDSS region known as Stripe 82 ( the southern equatorial stripe), where numerous photometric observations are available over a 10-year baseline. This area was observed by BOSS during September and October 2010. Only 8% of the objects selected via variability are not quasars, while 90% of the previously identified high-redshift quasar population is recovered. The method allows for a significant increase in the z > 2.15 quasar density over previous strategies based on optical (ugriz) colors, achieving a density of 24.0 deg(-2) on average down to g similar to 22 over the 220 deg(2) area of Stripe 82. We applied this method to simulated data from the Palomar Transient Factory and from Pan-STARRS, and showed that even with data that have sparser time sampling than what is available in Stripe 82, including variability in future quasar selection strategies would lead to increased target selection efficiency in the z > 2.15 redshift range. We also found that broad absorption line quasars are preferentially present in a variability than in a color selection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据