The QDOT all‐sky IRAS galaxy redshift survey

The QDOT all‐sky IRAS galaxy redshift survey
复制标题

DOI:
10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02593.x
复制
发表时间:
1999-10
影响因子:
4.8
通讯作者:
A. Lawrence;M. Rowan‐Robinson;R. Ellis;C. Frenk;G. Efstathiou;N. Kaiser;W. Saunders;I. Parry;Xia Xiao-yang;J. Crawford
A. Lawrence;M. Rowan‐Robinson;R. Ellis;C. Frenk;G. Efstathiou;N. Kaiser;W. Saunders;I. Parry;Xia Xiao-yang;J. Crawford
中科院分区:
物理与天体物理2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
A. Lawrence;M. Rowan‐Robinson;R. Ellis;C. Frenk;G. Efstathiou;N. Kaiser;W. Saunders;I. Parry;Xia Xiao-yang;J. Crawford

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

我们描述了建设QDOT调查,这是公开的匿名FTP帐户。该星表包含2387个亮度超过IRAS PSC 60 μm完整性极限(S60>0.6 Jy)的IRAS星系的全天样本的红外特性和红移,以六分之一的比例稀疏采样。在|B|>10°,在移除少量银河系源后,红移完整性优于98%(2086/2127)。1401 IRAS源的新红移被获得以完成星表;这些的测量和还原被描述,并且新的红移在这里被制成表格。我们还将所有来源制成表格,|B|>10°,到目前为止没有红移,以及与我们自己的工作或公布的速度相冲突的替代红移的来源。此外,还提供了95个超亮星系(即L 60 μm>1012 L)的列表。其中,约20%是某种活动星系核;宽线天体通常显示出强烈的Fe ii辐射。自从第一篇QDOT论文发表以来,已经有几百次速度变化:一些速度是新的,一些QDOT速度已经被更精确的值所取代,一些错误已经被纠正。我们还提出了一个新的分析的精度和线性的IRAS 60 μm通量。我们发现,通量的不确定性很好地描述了0.05-Jy固定尺寸的不确定性和8%的分数不确定性的组合。这还不足以导致Fisher等人假设的演化速率中的大的Malmquist型误差。然而,我们确实发现了PSC 60 μm通量尺度中非线性的边缘证据,在这个意义上,与亮源相比,暗源的通量可能高估了约5%。我们更新了以前的一些科学分析,以评估这些变化。主要的新结果如下。(1)光度函数总体上得到了很好的确定,但在最高光度处(L 60 μm>5×1012 L)的不确定性是几个因素,因为这是剩余的未识别物体几乎肯定集中的地方。(2)演化的最佳拟合速率略低于我们之前的估计;表示为密度变化为(1+z)p的纯密度演化,我们发现p=5.6±2.3。对可能的(但非常不确定的)通量非线性进行粗略校正,我们发现p=4.5±2.3。(3)偶极振幅略有下降,假设IRAS星系跟踪质量,密度参数的隐含值为Ω=0.9(+0.45,-0.25)。(4)最后,大尺度上密度方差的估计变化可以忽略不计,仍然表明与简单的冷暗物质宇宙起源的预测有显着差异。
We describe the construction of the QDOT survey, which is publicly available from an anonymous FTP account. The catalogue consists of infrared properties and redshifts of an all-sky sample of 2387 IRAS galaxies brighter than the IRAS PSC 60-μm completeness limit (S60>0.6 Jy), sparsely sampled at a rate of one-in-six. At |b|>10°, after removing a small number of Galactic sources, the redshift completeness is better than 98 per cent (2086/2127). New redshifts for 1401 IRAS sources were obtained to complete the catalogue; the measurement and reduction of these are described, and the new redshifts tabulated here. We also tabulate all sources at |b|>10° with no redshift so far, and sources with conflicting alternative redshifts either from our own work, or from published velocities. A list of 95 ultraluminous galaxies (i.e. with L60 μm>1012 L⊙) is also provided. Of these, ∼20 per cent are AGN of some kind; the broad-line objects typically show strong Fe ii emission. Since the publication of the first QDOT papers, there have been several hundred velocity changes: some velocities are new, some QDOT velocities have been replaced by more accurate values, and some errors have been corrected. We also present a new analysis of the accuracy and linearity of IRAS 60-μm fluxes. We find that the flux uncertainties are well described by a combination of 0.05-Jy fixed size uncertainty and 8 per cent fractional uncertainty. This is not enough to cause the large Malmquist-type errors in the rate of evolution postulated by Fisher et al. We do, however, find marginal evidence for non-linearity in the PSC 60-μm flux scale, in the sense that faint sources may have fluxes overestimated by about 5 per cent compared with bright sources. We update some of the previous scientific analyses to assess the changes. The main new results are as follows. (1) The luminosity function is very well determined overall but is uncertain by a factor of several at the very highest luminosities (L60 μm>5×1012 L⊙), as this is where the remaining unidentified objects are almost certainly concentrated. (2) The best-fitting rate of evolution is somewhat lower than our previous estimate; expressed as pure density evolution with density varying as (1+z)p, we find p=5.6±2.3. Making a rough correction for the possible (but very uncertain) non-linearity of fluxes, we find p=4.5±2.3. (3) The dipole amplitude decreases a little, and the implied value of the density parameter, assuming that IRAS galaxies trace the mass, is Ω=0.9(+0.45, −0.25). (4) Finally, the estimate of density variance on large scales changes negligibly, still indicating a significant discrepancy from the predictions of simple cold dark matter cosmogonies.