Researcher profile

A. Durkalec

A. Durkalec contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): Mid-infrared properties as tracers of galaxy environment

We investigate how different mid-infrared (mid-IR) properties of galaxies trace the environment in which the galaxies are located. For this purpose, we first study the dependence of galaxy clustering on the absolute magnitude at 3.4 $μ$m and redshift. Then, we look into the environmental dependence of mid-IR luminosities and the galaxy properties derived from these luminosities. We also explore how various infrared galaxy luminosity selections influence the galaxy clustering measurements. We use a set of W1 (3.4 $μ$m) absolute magnitude ($M_\text{W1}$) selected samples from the Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA) survey matched with mid-IR properties from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) in the redshift range $0.07 \leq z < 0.43$. We compute the galaxy two-point correlation function (2pCF) and compare the clustering lengths between subsamples binned in $M_\text{W1}$ and in redshift. We also measure the marked correlation functions (MCFs) using the luminosities in the WISE W1 to W4 (3.4 to 22 $μ$m) bands as marks. Additionally, we compare the measurements of MCFs with different estimates of stellar mass and star formation rate used as marks. Finally, we check how different selections applied to the sample affect the clustering measurements. We show strong clustering dependence on the W1 absolute magnitude: galaxies brighter in the W1 band are more strongly clustered than their fainter counterparts. We also observe a lack of significant redshift dependence of clustering in the redshift range $0.07 \leq z < 0.43$. We show that although W1 and W2 bands are direct indicators of stellar mass, a galaxy sample selected based on W1 or W2 bands does not perfectly show the clustering behaviour of a stellar mass selected sample. Similar is the case with the proxy relation between W3 and W4 bands and star formation rate.

preprint2022arXiv

The fundamental metallicity relation from SDSS (z~0) to VIPERS (z~0.7) Data selection or evolution

Aims. We focus on how to homogenize the comparison between galaxy samples having different characteristics. We check the projections of the fundamental metallicity relation (FMR) and the evolution of these projections between a sample selected at $z\sim0$ (SDSS) and $z\sim0.7$ (VIPERS). We check, in particular, whether and to what extent selection criteria can affect the results. Methods. We checked the influence of different biases introduced either by physical constraints (evolution of the luminosity function and differences in the fraction of blue galaxies) or data selection (the signal-to-noise ratio and quality of the spectra) on the FMR and its projections. To separate the differences occurring due to the physical evolution of galaxies with redshift from the false evolution mimed by these biases, we first analyzed the effects of these biases individually on the SDSS sample, and next, starting from the SDSS data, we built a VIPERS-equivalent $z \sim 0$ sample, replicating the main characteristics of VIPERS sample at $z\sim0.7$ for a fair comparison. Results. We found that the FMR projections are all sensitive to biases introduced by the selection on S/N and the quality flags of the emission line measurements in the spectra, especially the $\left[\text{O{\,\sc{iii}}}\right]λ4959$ line. The exception is the metallicity versus the sSFR plane which is insensitive to these biases. The evolution of the luminosity function introduces a bias only in the plane metallicity versus the star formation rate (SFR) while the fraction of blue galaxies has no impact on results.