Paper detail

Biases and systematics in the observational derivation of galaxy properties: comparing different techniques on synthetic observations of simulated galaxies

We study the sources of biases and systematics in the derivation of galaxy properties of observational studies, focusing on stellar masses, star formation rates, gas/stellar metallicities, stellar ages and magnitudes/colors. We use hydrodynamical cosmological simulations of galaxy formation, for which the real quantities are known, and apply observational techniques to derive the observables. We also make an analysis of biases that are relevant for a proper comparison between simulations and observations. For our study, we post-process the simulation outputs to calculate the galaxies' spectral energy distributions (SEDs) using Stellar Population Synthesis models and also generating the fully-consistent far UV-submillimeter wavelength SEDs with the radiative transfer code SUNRISE. We compared the direct results of simulations with the observationally-derived quantities obtained in various ways, and found that systematic differences in all studied galaxy properties appear, which are caused by: (1) purely observational biases, (2) the use of mass-weighted/luminosity-weighted quantities, with preferential sampling of more massive/luminous regions, (3) the different ways to construct the template of models when a fit to the spectra is performed, and (4) variations due to the use of different calibrations, most notably in the cases of the gas metallicities and star formation rates. Our results show that large differences can appear depending on the technique used to derive galaxy properties. Understanding these differences is of primary importance both for simulators, to allow a better judgement on similarities/differences with observations, and for observers, to allow a proper interpretation of the data.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.