Paper detail

The ALMA Patchy Deep Survey: A blind search for [CII] emitters at z~4.5

We present a result of a blind search for [CII] 158 $μ$m emitters at $z\sim 4.5$ using ALMA Cycle~0 archival data. We collected extra-galactic data covering at 330-360 GHz (band~7) from 8 Cycle~0 projects from which initial results have been already published. The total number of fields is 243 and the total on-source exposure time is 19.2 hours. We searched for line emitters in continuum-subtracted data cubes with spectral resolutions of 50, 100, 300 and 500 km/s. We could not detect any new line emitters above a 6-$σ$ significance level. This result provides upper limits to the [CII] luminosity function at $z\sim 4.5$ over $L_{\rm [CII]} \sim 10^8 - 10^{10} L_{\odot}$ or star formation rate, SFR $\sim$ 10-1000 M$_{^\odot}$/yr. These limits are at least 2 orders of magnitude larger than the [CII] luminosity functions expected from the $z \sim 4$ UV luminosity function or from numerical simulation. However, this study demonstrates that we would be able to better constrain the [CII] luminosity function and to investigate possible contributions from dusty galaxies to the cosmic star-formation rate density by collecting Cycle~1+2 archival data as the ALMA Patchy Deep Survey.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 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.