Paper detail

The VANDELS survey: a measurement of the average Lyman-continuum escape fraction of star-forming galaxies at z=3.5

We present a study designed to measure the average LyC escape fraction ($\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle$) of star-forming galaxies at z=3.5. We assemble a sample of 148 galaxies from the VANDELS survey at $3.35\leq z_{\rm spec}\leq3.95$, selected to minimize line-of-sight contamination of their photometry. For this sample, we use ultra-deep, ground-based, $U-$band imaging and HST $V-$band imaging to robustly measure the distribution of $\mathcal{R_{\rm obs}}$ $=(L_{\rm LyC}/L_{\rm UV})_{\rm obs}$. We then model the distribution as a function of $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle$, carefully accounting for attenuation by dust, and the IGM (and CGM). A maximum likelihood fit to the $\mathcal{R_{\rm obs}}$ distribution returns a best-fitting value of $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle =0.07\pm0.02$, a result confirmed using an alternative Bayesian inference technique (both exclude $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle=0.0$ at $> 3σ$). By splitting our sample in two, we find evidence that $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle$ is positively correlated with Ly$α$ equivalent width, with high and low sub-samples returning best fits of $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle=0.12^{+0.06}_{-0.04}$ and $\langle f_{\rm esc} \rangle=0.02^{+0.02}_{-0.01}$, respectively. In contrast, we find evidence that $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle$ is anti-correlated with intrinsic UV luminosity and UV dust attenuation; with low UV luminosity and dust attenuation sub-samples returning best fits in the range $0.10 \leq \langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle \leq 0.22$. We do not find evidence for a clear correlation between $f_{\rm esc}$ and galaxy stellar mass, suggesting it is not a primary indicator of leakage. Although larger samples are needed to further explore these trends, they suggest that it is entirely plausible that the low dust and metallicity galaxies found at z > 6 will display the $\langle f_{\rm esc}\rangle\geq0.1$ required to drive reionization.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access23 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.