Paper detail

HST Grism-derived Forecasts for Future Galaxy Redshift Surveys

The mutually complementary Euclid and Roman galaxy redshift surveys will use Halpha- and [OIII]-selected emission line galaxies as tracers of the large scale structure at $0.9 \lesssim z \lesssim 1.9$ (Halpha) and $1.5 \lesssim z \lesssim 2.7$ ([OIII]). It is essential to have a reliable and sufficiently precise knowledge of the expected numbers of Halpha-emitting galaxies in the survey volume in order to optimize these redshift surveys for the study of dark energy. Additionally, these future samples of emission-line galaxies will, like all slitless spectroscopy surveys, be affected by a complex selection function that depends on galaxy size and luminosity, line equivalent width, and redshift errors arising from the misidentification of single emission-line galaxies. Focusing on the specifics of the Euclid survey, we combine two slitless spectroscopic WFC3-IR datasets -- 3D-HST+AGHAST and the WISP survey -- to construct a Euclid-like sample that covers an area of 0.56 deg$^2$ and includes 1277 emission line galaxies. We detect 1091 ($\sim$3270 deg$^{-2}$) Halpha+[NII]-emitting galaxies in the range $0.9\leq z \leq 1.6$ and 162 ($\sim$440 deg$^{-2}$) [OIII]$λ$5007-emitters over $1.5\leq z \leq 2.3$ with line fluxes $\geq 2 \times 10^{-16}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$. The median of the Halpha+[NII] equivalent width distribution is $\sim$250Å, and the effective radii of the continuum and Halpha+[NII] emission are correlated with a median of $\sim$0.38" and significant scatter ($σ\sim $0.2"$-$0.35"). Finally, we explore the prevalence of redshift misidentification in future Euclid samples, finding potential contamination rates of $\sim$14-20% and $\sim$6% down to $2\times 10^{-16}$ and $6 \times 10^{-17}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, respectively, though with increased wavelength coverage these percentages drop to nearly zero.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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.

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 graph slice

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.