Serious

I know. Serious bees wax sounds pretty serious. Unfortunately, on occasion I am forced to face reality and be (a bit) serious. Fortunately, the serious bees wax is also fun. If you were unaware, I do science. Specifically physics. More specifically astrophysics. Or is it astonomy... Once of those two. I should probably find out which... At least my supervisor doesn't know either...

Anyway. As a byproduct of being serious, I have some papers full of useful science. I deal with galaxy evolution and have "experties" in far-infrared observation, SED modelling with multi- wavelength data, Bayesian statistics, forward modelling and deep learning. My papers will tell you more.

Effect of galaxy mergers on star-formation rates

W. J. Pearson et al., A&A, 631, 51 (2019)

Context: Galaxy mergers and interactions are an integral part of our basic understanding of how galaxies grow and evolve over time. However, the effect that galaxy mergers have on star formation rates (SFR) is contested, with observations of galaxy mergers showing reduced, enhanced and highly enhanced star formation

Aims: We aim to determine the effect of galaxy mergers on the SFR of galaxies using statistically large samples of galaxies, totalling over 200 000, over a large redshift range, 0.0 to 4.0.

Methods: We train and use convolutional neural networks to create binary merger identifications (merger or non-merger) in the SDSS, KiDS and CANDELS imaging surveys. We then compare the galaxy main sequence subtracted SFR of the merging and non-merging galaxies to determine what effect, if any, a galaxy merger has on SFR.

Results: We find that the SFR of merging galaxies are not significantly different from the SFR of non-merging systems. The changes in the average SFR seen in the star forming population when a galaxy is merging are small, of the order of a factor of 1.2. However, the higher the SFR above the galaxy main sequence, the higher the fraction of galaxy mergers.

Conclusions: Galaxy mergers have little effect on the SFR of the majority of merging galaxies compared to the non-merging galaxies. The typical change in SFR is less than 0.1 dex in either direction. Larger changes in SFR can be seen but are less common. The increase in merger fraction as the distance above the galaxy main sequence increases demonstrates that galaxy mergers can induce starbursts

Identifying galaxy mergers in observations and simulations with deep learning

W. J. Pearson et al., A&A, 626, 49 (2019)

Context: Mergers are an important aspect of galaxy formation and evolution. With large upcoming surveys, such as Euclid and LSST, accurate techniques that are fast and efficient are needed to identify galaxy mergers for further study.

Aims: We aim to test whether deep learning techniques can be used to reproduce visual classification of observations, physical classification of simulations and highlight any differences between these two classifications. With one of the main difficulties of merger studies being the lack of a truth sample, we can use our method to test biases in visually identified merger catalogues.

Methods: A convolutional neural network architecture was developed and trained in two ways: one with observations from SDSS and one with simulated galaxies from EAGLE, processed to mimic the SDSS observations. The SDSS images were also classified by the simulation trained network and the EAGLE images classified by the observation trained network.

Results: The observationally trained network achieves an accuracy of 91.5% while the simulation trained network achieves 65.2% on the visually classified SDSS and physically classified EAGLE images respectively. Classifying the SDSS images with the simulation trained network was less successful, only achieving an accuracy of 64.6%, while classifying the EAGLE images with the observation network was very poor, achieving an accuracy of only 53.0% with preferential assignment to the non-merger classification. This suggests that most of the simulated mergers do not have conspicuous merger features and visually identified merger catalogues from observations are incomplete and biased towards certain merger types.

Conclusions: The networks trained and tested with the same data perform the best, with observations performing better than simulations, a result of the observational sample being biased towards conspicuous mergers. Classifying SDSS observations with the simulation trained network has proven to work, providing tantalizing prospects for using simulation trained networks for galaxy identification in large surveys.

Main sequence of star forming galaxies beyond the Herschel confusion limit

W. J. Pearson et al., A&A, 615, 146 (2018)

Context: Deep far-infrared (FIR) cosmological surveys are known to be affected by source confusion, causing issues when examining the main sequence (MS) of star forming galaxies. In the past this has typically been partially tackled by the use of stacking. However, stacking only provides the average properties of the objects in the stack.

Aims: This work aims to trace the MS over 0.2 ≤ z < 6.0 using the latest de-blended Herschel photometry, which reaches ≈ 10 times deeper than the 5σ confusion limit in SPIRE. This provides more reliable star formation rates (SFRs), especially for the fainter galaxies, and hence a more reliable MS.

Methods: We built a pipeline that uses the spectral energy distribution (SED) modelling and fitting tool CIGALE to generate flux density priors in the Herschel SPIRE bands. These priors were then fed into the de-blending tool XID+ to extract flux densities from the SPIRE maps. In the final step, multi-wavelength data were combined with the extracted SPIRE flux densities to constrain SEDs and provide stellar mass (M) and SFRs. These M and SFRs were then used to populate the SFR-M plane over 0.2 ≤ z < 6.0.

Results: No significant evidence of a high-mass turn-over was found; the best fit is thus a simple two-parameter power law of the form log(SFR) = α[log(M) - 10.5] + β. The normalisation of the power law increases with redshift, rapidly at z ≲ 1.8, from 0.58 ± 0.09 at z ≈ 0.37 to 1.31 ± 0.08 at z ≈ 1.8. The slope is also found to increase with redshift, perhaps with an excess around 1.8 ≤ z < 2.9.

Conclusions: The increasing slope indicates that galaxies become more self-similar as redshift increases. This implies that the specific SFR of high-mass galaxies increases with redshift, from 0.2 to 6.0, becoming closer to that of low-mass galaxies. The excess in the slope at 1.8 ≤ z < 2.9, if present, coincides with the peak of the cosmic star formation history.

De-blending Deep Herschel Surveys: A Multi-wavelength Approach

W. J. Pearson et al., A&A, 603, 102 (2017)

Aims: Cosmological surveys in the far-infrared are known to suffer from confusion. The Bayesian de-blending tool, XID+, currently provides one of the best ways to de-confuse deep Herschel SPIRE images, using a flat flux density prior. This work is to demonstrate that existing multi-wavelength data sets can be exploited to improve XID+ by providing an informed prior, resulting in more accurate and precise extracted flux densities.

Methods: Photometric data for galaxies in the COSMOS field were used to constrain spectral energy distributions (SEDs) using the fitting tool CIGALE. These SEDs were used to create Gaussian prior estimates in the SPIRE bands for XID+. The multi-wavelength photometry and the extracted SPIRE flux densities were run through CIGALE again to allow us to compare the performance of the two priors. Inferred ALMA flux densities (FinferALMA), at 870 μm and 1250 μm, from the best fitting SEDs from the second CIGALE run were compared with measured ALMA flux densities (FmeasALMA) as an independent performance validation. Similar validations were conducted with the SED modelling and fitting tool MAGPHYS and modified black-body functions to test for model dependency.

Results: We demonstrate a clear improvement in agreement between the flux densities extracted with XID+ and existing data at other wavelengths when using the new informed Gaussian prior over the original uninformed prior. The residuals between (FmeasALMA) and (FinferALMA) were calculated. For the Gaussian priors these residuals, expressed as a multiple of the ALMA error (σ), have a smaller standard deviation, 7.95σ for the Gaussian prior compared to 12.21σ for the flat prior; reduced mean, 1.83σ compared to 3.44σ and have reduced skew to positive values, 7.97 compared to 11.50. These results were determined to not be significantly model dependent. This results in statistically more reliable SPIRE flux densities and hence statistically more reliable infrared luminosity estimates.