4.6 Article

The K20 survey - III. Photometric and spectroscopic properties of the sample

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 392, 期 2, 页码 395-406

出版社

E D P SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020861

关键词

galaxies : evolution; galaxies : formation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The K20 survey is an ESO VLT optical and near-infrared spectroscopic survey aimed at obtaining spectral information and redshifts of a complete sample of about 550 objects to K-s less than or equal to 20.0 over two independent fields with a total area of 52 arcmin(2). In this paper we discuss the scientific motivation of such a survey, we describe the photometric and spectroscopic properties of the sample, and we release the K-s-band photometric catalog. Extensive simulations showed that the sample is photometrically highly complete to K-s = 20. The observed galaxy counts and the R - K-s color distribution are consistent with literature results. We observed spectroscopically 94% of the sample, reaching a spectroscopic redshift identification completeness of 92% to K-s less than or equal to 20.0 for the observed targets, and of 87% for the whole sample (i.e. counting also the unobserved targets). Deep spectroscopy was complemented with multi-band deep imaging in order to derive tested and reliable photometric redshifts for the galaxies lacking spectroscopic redshifts. The results show a very good agreement between the spectroscopic and the photometric redshifts with < z(spe) - z(phot) > = 0.01 and with a dispersion of sigma(Deltaz) = 0.09. Using both the spectroscopic and the photometric redshifts, we reached an overall redshift completeness of about 98%. The size of the sample, the redshift completeness, the availability of high quality photometric redshifts and multicolor spectral energy distributions make the K20 survey database one of the most complete samples available to date for constraining the currently competing scenarios of galaxy formation and for a variety of other galaxy evolution studies.

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