Paper detail

Number Counts At 3 < lambda < 10 um From the Spitzer Space Telescope

Infrared source counts at wavelengths 3 < lambda < 10 um cover more than 10 magnitudes in source brightness, four orders of magnitude in surface density, and reach an integrated surface density of 10^5 sources/deg^2. At m<14 mag, most of the sources are Galactic stars, in agreement with models. After removal of Galactic stars, galaxy counts are consistent with what few measurements exist at nearby wavelengths. At 3.6 and 4.5 um, the galaxy counts follow the expectations of a Euclidean world model down to ~16 mag and drop below the Euclidean curve for fainter magnitudes. Counts at these wavelengths begin to show decreasing completeness around magnitude 19.5. At 5.8 and 8 um, the counts relative to a Euclidean world model show a large excess at bright magnitudes. This is probably because local galaxies emit strongly in the aromatic dust (``PAH&#39;&#39;) features. The counts at 3.6 um resolve <50% of the Cosmic Infrared Background at that wavelength.

preprint2004arXivOpen 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.