Paper detail

The FUV to Near-IR Morphologies of Luminous Infrared Galaxies in the GOALS Sample

We compare the morphologies of a sample of 20 LIRGs from the Great Observatories All-sky LIRG Survey (GOALS) in the FUV, B, I and H bands, using the Gini (G) and M20 parameters to quantitatively estimate the distribution and concentration of flux as a function of wavelength. HST images provide an average spatial resolution of ~80 pc. While our LIRGs can be reliably classified as mergers across the entire range of wavelengths studied here, there is a clear shift toward more negative M20 (more bulge-dominated) and a less significant decrease in G values at longer wavelengths. We find no correlation between the derived FUV G-M20 parameters and the global measures of the IR to FUV flux ratio, IRX. Given the fine resolution in our HST data, this suggests either that the UV morphology and IRX are correlated on very small scales, or that the regions emitting the bulk of the IR emission emit almost no FUV light. We use our multi-wavelength data to simulate how merging LIRGs would appear from z~0.5-3 in deep optical and near-infrared images such as the HUDF, and use these simulations to measure the G-M20 at these redshifts. Our simulations indicate a noticeable decrease in G, which flattens at z >= 2 by as much as 40%, resulting in mis-classifying our LIRGs as disk-like, even in the rest-frame FUV. The higher redshift values of M20 for the GOALS sources do not appear to change more than about 10% from the values at z~0. The change in G-M20 is caused by the surface brightness dimming of extended tidal features and asymmetries, and also the decreased spatial resolution which reduced the number of individual clumps identified. This effect, seen as early as z~0.5, could easily lead to an underestimate of the number of merging galaxies at high-redshift in the rest-frame FUV.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access12 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.

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.