Paper detail

redMaGiC: Selecting Luminous Red Galaxies from the DES Science Verification Data

We introduce redMaGiC, an automated algorithm for selecting Luminous Red Galaxies (LRGs). The algorithm was specifically developed to minimize photometric redshift uncertainties in photometric large-scale structure studies. redMaGiC achieves this by self-training the color-cuts necessary to produce a luminosity-thresholded LRG sample of constant comoving density. We demonstrate that redMaGiC photozs are very nearly as accurate as the best machine-learning based methods, yet they require minimal spectroscopic training, do not suffer from extrapolation biases, and are very nearly Gaussian. We apply our algorithm to Dark Energy Survey (DES) Science Verification (SV) data to produce a redMaGiC catalog sampling the redshift range $z\in[0.2,0.8]$. Our fiducial sample has a comoving space density of $10^{-3}\ (h^{-1} Mpc)^{-3}$, and a median photoz bias ($z_{spec}-z_{photo}$) and scatter $(σ_z/(1+z))$ of 0.005 and 0.017 respectively. The corresponding $5σ$ outlier fraction is 1.4%. We also test our algorithm with Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Data Release 8 (DR8) and Stripe 82 data, and discuss how spectroscopic training can be used to control photoz biases at the 0.1% level.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.