Issue |
A&A
Volume 565, May 2014
|
|
---|---|---|
Article Number | A67 | |
Number of page(s) | 18 | |
Section | Extragalactic astronomy | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201423409 | |
Published online | 13 May 2014 |
The VIMOS Public Extragalactic Redshift Survey (VIPERS) ⋆,⋆⋆
Never mind the gaps: comparing techniques to restore homogeneous sky coverage
1
Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia - Università di Bologna,
viale Berti Pichat 6/2,
40127
Bologna,
Italy
e-mail:
olga.cucciati@oabo.inaf.it
2
INAF – Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna,
via Ranzani 1, 40127
Bologna,
Italy
3
INAF – Osservatorio Astronomico di Brera, via Brera 28, 20122
Milano, via E. Bianchi 46, 23807
Merate,
Italy
4
Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università degli Studi Roma
Tre, via della Vasca Navale
84, 00146
Roma,
Italy
5
INFN, Sezione di Roma Tre, via della Vasca Navale 84,
00146
Roma,
Italy
6
INAF – Osservatorio Astronomico di Roma, via Frascati 33,
00040
Monte Porzio Catone,
Italy
7
INFN, Sezione di Bologna, viale Berti Pichat 6/2,
40127
Bologna,
Italy
8
SUPA, Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Royal
Observatory, Blackford
Hill, Edinburgh
EH9 3HJ,
UK
9
Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di
Milano-Bicocca, Piazza della Scienza
3, 20126
Milano,
Italy
10
INAF – Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica Milano,
via Bassini 15, 20133
Milano,
Italy
11
Aix-Marseille Université, CNRS, LAM (Laboratoire d’Astro-physique
de Marseille) UMR 7326, 13388
Marseille,
France
12
Astronomical Observatory of the University of Geneva,
ch. d’Ecogia 16,
1290
Versoix,
Switzerland
13
Institute of Physics, Jan Kochanowski University,
ul. Swietokrzyska
15, 25-406
Kielce,
Poland
14
Department of Particle and Astrophysical Science, Nagoya
University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku,
464-8602
Nagoya,
Japan
15
Astronomical Observatory of the Jagiellonian University,
Orla 171,
30-001
Cracow,
Poland
16
National Centre for Nuclear Research, ul. Hoza 69,
00-681
Warszawa,
Poland
17
INAF – Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica Bologna,
via Gobetti 101, 40129
Bologna,
Italy
18
INAF – Istituto di Radioastronomia, via Gobetti 101,
40129
Bologna,
Italy
Received:
13
January
2014
Accepted:
16
March
2014
Aims. Non-uniform sampling and gaps in sky coverage are common in galaxy redshift surveys, but these effects can degrade galaxy counts-in-cells measurements and density estimates. We carry out a comparative study of methods that aim to fill the gaps to correct for the systematic effects. Our study is motivated by the analysis of the VIMOS Public Extragalactic Redshift Survey (VIPERS), a flux-limited survey at iAB < 22.5 consisting of single-pass observations with the VLT Visible Multi-Object Spectrograph (VIMOS) with gaps representing 25% of the surveyed area and an averagesampling rate of 35%. However, our findings are generally applicable to other redshift surveys with similar observing strategies.
Methods. We applied two algorithms that use photometric redshift information and assign redshifts to galaxies based upon the spectroscopic redshifts of the nearest neighbours. We compared these methods with two Bayesian methods, the Wiener filter and the Poisson-Lognormal filter. Using galaxy mock catalogues we quantified the accuracy and precision of the counts-in-cells measurements on scales of R = 5 h-1 Mpc and 8 h-1 Mpc after applying each of these methods. We further investigated how these methods perform to account for other sources of uncertainty typical of spectroscopic surveys, such as the spectroscopic redshift error and the sparse, inhomogeneous sampling rate. We analysed each of these sources separately, then all together in a mock catalogue that mimicks the full observational strategy of a VIPERS-like survey.
Results. In a survey such as VIPERS, the errors in counts-in-cells measurements on R < 10 h-1 Mpc scales are dominated by the sparseness of the sample due to the single-pass observing strategy. All methods under-predict the counts in high-density regions by 20–35%, depending on the cell size, method, and underlying overdensity. This systematic bias is similar to random errors. No method outperforms the others: differences are not large, and methods with the smallest random errors can be more affected by systematic errors than others. Random and systematic errors decrease with the increasing size of the cell. All methods can effectively separate under-dense from over-dense regions by considering cells in the 1st and 5th quintiles of the probability distribution of the observed counts.
Conclusions. We show that despite systematic uncertainties, it is possible to reconstruct the lowest and highest density environments on scales of 5 h-1 Mpc at moderate redshifts 0.5 ≲ z ≲ 1.1, over a large volume such as the one covered by the VIPERS survey. This is vital for characterising cosmic variance and rare populations (e.g, brightest galaxies) in environmental studies at these redshifts.
Key words: cosmology: observations / large-scale structure of Universe / galaxies: high-redshift / galaxies: statistics
Based on observations collected at the European Southern Observatory, Cerro Paranal, Chile, using the Very Large Telescope under programs 182.A-0886 and partly 070.A-9007. Also based on observations obtained with MegaPrime/MegaCam, a joint project of CFHT and CEA/DAPNIA, at the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT), which is operated by the National Research Council (NRC) of Canada, the Institut National des Sciences de l’Univers, of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) of France, and the University of Hawaii. This work is based in part on data products produced at TERAPIX and the Canadian Astronomy Data Centre as part of the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey, a collaborative project of NRC and CNRS. The VIPERS website is http://www.vipers.inaf.it/
Appendix A is available in electronic form at http://www.aanda.org
© ESO, 2014
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.