Paper detail

Morphological Classification of Local Luminous Infrared Galaxies

We present an analysis of the morphological classification of 89 luminous infrared galaxies (LIRGs) from the Great Observatories All-sky LIRG Survey (GOALS) sample using non-parametric coefficients and compare their morphology as a function of wavelength. We rely on images obtained in the optical (B- and I-band) as well as in the infrared (H-band and 5.8$μ$m). Our classification is based on the calculation of $Gini$ and the second order of light ($M_{20}$) non-parametric coefficients which we explore as a function of stellar mass ($M_\star$), infrared luminosity ($L_{IR}$) and star formation rate (SFR). We investigate the relation between $M_{20}$, the specific SFR (sSFR) and the dust temperature ($T_{dust}$) in our galaxy sample. We find that $M_{20}$ is a better morphological tracer than $Gini$, as it allows to distinguish systems formed by double systems from isolated and post-merger LIRGs. The multi-wavelength analysis allows us to identify a region in the $Gini$-$M_{20}$ parameter space where ongoing mergers reside, regardless of the band used to calculate the coefficients. In particular when measured in the H-band, this region can be used to identify ongoing mergers, with a minimal contamination from LIRGs in other stages. We also find that while the sSFR is positively correlated with $M_{20}$ when measured in the mid-infrared, i.e. star-bursting galaxies show more compact emission, it is anti-correlated with the B-band based $M_{20}$. We interpret this as the spatial decoupling between obscured and un-obscured star formation, whereby the ultraviolet/optical size of a LIRGs experience an intense dust enshrouded central starburst is larger than in the one in the mid-infrared since the contrast between the nuclear to the extended disk emission is smaller in the mid-infrared. This has important implications for high redshift surveys of dusty sources. [abridged]

preprint2016arXivOpen 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.

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 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.