Horizon-AGN virtual observatory - 1. SED-fitting performance and forecasts for future imaging surveys
Authors: C. Laigle, I. Davidzon, O. Ilbert, J. Devriendt, D. Kashino, C. Pichon, P. Capak, S. Arnouts, S. de la Torre, Y. Dubois, G. Gozaliasl, D. Le Borgne, S. Lilly, H. J. McCracken, M. Salvato, A. Slyz
Abstract: Using the ligthcone from the cosmological hydrodynamical simulation Horizon-AGN, we produced a photometric catalogue over $0<z<4$ with apparent magnitudes in COSMOS, DES, LSST-like, and Euclid-like filters at depths comparable to these surveys. The virtual photometry accounts for the complex star formation history and metal enrichment of Horizon-AGN galaxies, and consistently includes magnitude errors, dust attenuation and absorption by inter-galactic medium. The COSMOS-like photometry is fitted in the same configuration as the COSMOS2015 catalogue. We then quantify random and systematic errors of photometric redshifts, stellar masses, and star-formation rates (SFR). Photometric redshifts and redshift errors capture the same dependencies on magnitude and redshift as found in COSMOS2015, excluding the impact of source extraction. COSMOS-like stellar masses are well recovered with a dispersion typically lower than 0.1 dex. The simple star formation histories and metallicities of the templates induce a systematic underestimation of stellar masses at $z<1.5$ by at most 0.12 dex. SFR estimates exhibit a dust-induced bimodality combined with a larger scatter (typically between 0.2 and 0.6 dex). We also use our mock catalogue to predict photometric redshifts and stellar masses in future imaging surveys. We stress that adding Euclid near-infrared photometry to the LSST-like baseline improves redshift accuracy especially at the faint end and decreases the outlier fraction by a factor $\sim$2. It also considerably improves stellar masses, reducing the scatter up to a factor 3. It would therefore be mutually beneficial for LSST and Euclid to work in synergy.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.