Euclid preparation XXVI: The Euclid Morphology Challenge. Towards structural parameters for billions of galaxies

AI-generated keywords: Euclid Imaging Surveys

AI-generated Key Points

The Euclid imaging surveys will cover an unprecedented area of 15,000 square degrees with high spatial resolution and become a reference for studies of galaxy morphology.
The Euclid Morphology Challenge was conducted to understand the capabilities of measuring morphologies from Euclid-detected galaxies and to help implement measurements in the pipeline.
Five state-of-the-art surface-brightness-fitting codes were evaluated on a sample of about 1.5 million simulated galaxies resembling reduced observations with the Euclid VIS and NIR instruments.
All methods tended to achieve reliable structural measurements down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components, but results were typically degraded by a factor of three when tested on non-analytic profiles due to systematics.
Different behavior at the faint end is found to be explained by the set of adopted priors for various structural parameters.
Bulge-disk decompositions are more challenging to perform than single-Sérsic simulations.
Reliable structural measurements can be achieved down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components using state-of-the art surface brightness fitting codes such as DeepLeGATo, Galapagos -2, Morfometryka, Profit, and SourceXtractor++.
The official Data Releases from Euclid are expected to deliver robust structural parameters for at least 400 million galaxies in the Euclid Wide Survey by the end of its mission.

Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: S. Davini, N. Mauri, L. Patrizii, G. Sirri, L. Wang, Y. Wang, A. A. Nucita, O. Ilbert, M. Meneghetti, Euclid Collaboration, G. Desprez, S. Paltani, J. Coupon, M. Brescia, S. Cavuoti, S. Fotopoulou, W. G. Hartley, M. Castellano, F. Dubath, E. Merlin, S. Andreon, N. Auricchio, C. Baccigalupi, M. Baldi, S. Bardelli, R. Bender, A. Biviano, C. Bodendorf, E. Branchini, J. Brinchmann, C. Burigana, R. Cabanac, S. Camera, V. Capobianco, A. Cappi, C. Carbone, J. Carretero, C. S. Carvalho, S. Casas, F. J. Castander, G. Castignani, A. Cimatti, R. Cledassou, C. Colodro-Conde, G. Congedo, C. J. Conselice, L. Conversi, Y. Copin, L. Corcione, H. M. Courtois, A. Da Silva, H. Degaudenzi, D. Di Ferdinando, C. A. J. Duncan, X. Dupac, M. Fabricius, S. Farrens, M. Frailis, E. Franceschi, M. Fumana, S. Galeotta, B. Garilli, B. Gillis, C. Giocoli, G. Gozaliasl, J. Graciá-Carpio, F. Grupp, S. V. H. Haugan, W. Holmes, F. Hormuth, K. Jahnke, E. Keihanen, S. Kermiche, C. C. Kirkpatrick, R. Kohley, M. Kunz, H. Kurki-Suonio, S. Ligori, P. B. Lilje, I. Lloro, O. Marggraf, K. Markovic, N. Martinet, F. Marulli, R. Massey, M. Maturi, E. Medinaceli, S. Mei, G. Meylan, M. Moresco, L. Moscardini, E. Munari, C. Padilla, F. Pasian, V. Pettorino, G. Polenta, M. Poncet, D. Potter, L. Pozzetti, F. Raison, A. Renzi, J. Rhodes, G. Riccio, E. Rossetti, R. Saglia, D. Sapone, P. Schneider, V. Scottez, A. Secroun, C. Sirignano, A. N. Taylor, I. Tereno, R. Toledo-Moreo, L. Valenziano, J. Valiviita, T. Vassallo, M. Viel, G. Zamorani, J. Zoubian, E. Zucca, F. Courbin, H. Bretonnière, M. Huertas-Company, U. Kuchner, D. Tuccillo, F. Buitrago, A. Fontana, M. Kümmel, B. Häußler, A. Alvarez Ayllon, E. Bertin, F. Ferrari, L. Ferreira, R. Gavazzi, D. Hernández-Lang, G. Lucatelli, A. S. G. Robotham, M. Schefer, C. Tortora, N. Aghanim, A. Amara, M. Cropper, J. Dinis, S. Dusini, S. Ferriol, A. Grazian, H. Hoekstra, A. Hornstrup, P. Hudelot, A. Kiessling, O. Mansutti, M. Melchior, S. M. Niemi, K. Pedersen, R. Rebolo, E. Romelli, B. Sartoris, G. Seidel, J. Skottfelt, J. -L. Starck, P. Tallada-Crespí, I. Tutusaus, J. Weller, A. Boucaud, V. Lindholm, M. Ballardini, F. Bernardeau, S. Borgani, A. S. Borlaff, A. R. Cooray, G. De Lucia, J. A. Escartin, S. Escoffier, M. Farina, K. Ganga, J. Garcia-Bellido, K. George, H. Hildebrandt, I. Hook, B. Joachimi, V. Kansal, A. Loureiro, J. Macias-Perez, M. Magliocchetti, R. Maoli, S. Marcin, M. Martinelli, P. Monaco, G. Morgante, S. Nadathur, V. Popa, C. Porciani, A. Pourtsidou, M. Pöntinen, P. Reimberg, A. G. Sánchez, Z. Sakr, M. Schirmer, M. Sereno, J. Stadel, R. Teyssier, S. E. van Mierlo, A. Veropalumbo, J. R. Weaver, D. Scott, P. -A. Duc, S. Kruk, A. La Marca, B. Margalef-Bentabol, F. R. Marleau, R. Azzollini, H. J. McCracken, W. Percival, C. Rosset, E. A. Valentijn, S. Ilić, E. Sefusatti

arXiv: 2209.12907v1 - DOI (astro-ph.GA)

30 pages, 23+6 figures, Euclid pre-launch key paper. Companion paper: Euclid Collaboration: Merlin et al. 2022

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: The various Euclid imaging surveys will become a reference for studies of galaxy morphology by delivering imaging over an unprecedented area of 15 000 square degrees with high spatial resolution. In order to understand the capabilities of measuring morphologies from Euclid-detected galaxies and to help implement measurements in the pipeline, we have conducted the Euclid Morphology Challenge, which we present in two papers. While the companion paper by Merlin et al. focuses on the analysis of photometry, this paper assesses the accuracy of the parametric galaxy morphology measurements in imaging predicted from within the Euclid Wide Survey. We evaluate the performance of five state-of-the-art surface-brightness-fitting codes DeepLeGATo, Galapagos-2, Morfometryka, Profit and SourceXtractor++ on a sample of about 1.5 million simulated galaxies resembling reduced observations with the Euclid VIS and NIR instruments. The simulations include analytic S\'ersic profiles with one and two components, as well as more realistic galaxies generated with neural networks. We find that, despite some code-specific differences, all methods tend to achieve reliable structural measurements (10% scatter on ideal S\'ersic simulations) down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components, which correspond to a signal-to-noise ratio of approximately 1 and 5 respectively. We also show that when tested on non-analytic profiles, the results are typically degraded by a factor of 3, driven by systematics. We conclude that the Euclid official Data Releases will deliver robust structural parameters for at least 400 million galaxies in the Euclid Wide Survey by the end of the mission. We find that a key factor for explaining the different behaviour of the codes at the faint end is the set of adopted priors for the various structural parameters.

Submitted to arXiv on 26 Sep. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2209.12907v1

Comprehensive Summary
Key points
Layman's Summary
Blog article

The Euclid imaging surveys are set to become a reference for studies of galaxy morphology by delivering imaging over an unprecedented area of 15,000 square degrees with high spatial resolution. To understand the capabilities of measuring morphologies from Euclid-detected galaxies and to help implement measurements in the pipeline, the Euclid Morphology Challenge was conducted. This challenge is presented in two papers, with one focusing on photometry analysis and the other assessing the accuracy of parametric galaxy morphology measurements in imaging predicted from within the Euclid Wide Survey. In this paper, five state-of-the-art surface-brightness-fitting codes (DeepLeGATo, Galapagos-2, Morfometryka, Profit, and SourceXtractor++) were evaluated on a sample of about 1.5 million simulated galaxies resembling reduced observations with the Euclid VIS and NIR instruments. The simulations included analytic S\'ersic profiles with one and two components as well as more realistic galaxies generated with neural networks. Despite some code-specific differences, all methods tended to achieve reliable structural measurements down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components. This corresponds to a signal-to-noise ratio of approximately 1 and 5 respectively. When tested on non-analytic profiles, however, results were typically degraded by a factor of three due to systematics. A key factor explaining different behavior at the faint end is found to be the set of adopted priors for various structural parameters. Looking ahead to Fig.6's summary plot reveals that all codes slightly overestimate galaxy sizes but there are no major differences between them regarding bias values. For intermediate magnitudes (IE =17-23), Galapagos-2 and SourceXtractor++ perform similarly while DeepLeGATo and Morfometryka have a higher positive bias. Single-Sérsic simulations yield the best results, with the lowest residuals, always remaining below 4σ of the noise level. Bulge-disk decompositions are more challenging to perform, as evident from the residuals of subtraction. In conclusion, this paper's evaluation shows that reliable structural measurements can be achieved down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components using state-of-the art surface brightness fitting codes such as DeepLeGATo , Galapagos - 2 , Morfometryka , Profit , and SourceXtractor ++ . The official Data Releases from Euclid are expected to deliver robust structural parameters for at least 400 million galaxies in the Euclid Wide Survey by the end of its mission .

- The Euclid imaging surveys will cover an unprecedented area of 15,000 square degrees with high spatial resolution and become a reference for studies of galaxy morphology.
- The Euclid Morphology Challenge was conducted to understand the capabilities of measuring morphologies from Euclid-detected galaxies and to help implement measurements in the pipeline.
- Five state-of-the-art surface-brightness-fitting codes were evaluated on a sample of about 1.5 million simulated galaxies resembling reduced observations with the Euclid VIS and NIR instruments.
- All methods tended to achieve reliable structural measurements down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components, but results were typically degraded by a factor of three when tested on non-analytic profiles due to systematics.
- Different behavior at the faint end is found to be explained by the set of adopted priors for various structural parameters.
- Bulge-disk decompositions are more challenging to perform than single-Sérsic simulations.
- Reliable structural measurements can be achieved down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components using state-of-the art surface brightness fitting codes such as DeepLeGATo, Galapagos -2, Morfometryka, Profit, and SourceXtractor++.
- The official Data Releases from Euclid are expected to deliver robust structural parameters for at least 400 million galaxies in the Euclid Wide Survey by the end of its mission.

Euclid is a telescope that will take pictures of a really big area in space. The pictures will show how galaxies look. Scientists did a test to see how well they can measure the shapes of the galaxies in the pictures. They used five different computer programs to do this. The programs were good at measuring most of the galaxies, but not all of them. Some galaxies were too faint or had weird shapes that made it harder for the programs to measure them. Euclid will give us information about millions of galaxies when it finishes taking pictures." Definitions- Euclid: A telescope that takes pictures of space. - Galaxy: A large group of stars and other matter in space. - Morphology: The shape and structure of something. - Instrument: A tool used for scientific purposes. - Surface brightness fitting codes: Computer programs used to measure the shapes of galaxies based on their brightness levels. - Apparent magnitude: How bright an object appears from Earth. - Bulge-disk decompositions: Separating a galaxy's central bulge from its disk-shaped body. - Data Releases: Information made available to scientists after analyzing data collected by Euclid during its mission.

Exploring the Capabilities of Measuring Galaxy Morphologies with Euclid Imaging Surveys

Evaluating State-of-the-Art Surface Brightness Fitting Codes

In this paper, five state-of-the-art surface brightness fitting codes (DeepLeGATo, Galapagos - 2 , Morfometryka , Profit , and SourceXtractor++) were evaluated on a sample of about 1.5 million simulated galaxies resembling reduced observations with the Euclid VIS and NIR instruments. The simulations included analytic Sérsic profiles with one and two components as well as more realistic galaxies generated with neural networks.

Results

Despite some code specific differences, all methods tended to achieve reliable structural measurements down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components. This corresponds to a signal-to-noise ratio of approximately 1 and 5 respectively. When tested on nonanalytic profiles however results were typically degraded by a factor of three due to systematics. A key factor explaining different behavior at the faint end is found to be the set of adopted priors for various structural parameters. Looking ahead to Fig 6's summary plot reveals that all codes slightly overestimate galaxy sizes but there are no major differences between them regarding bias values. For intermediate magnitudes (IE =17–23), Galapagos – 2 and SourceXtractor++ perform similarly while DeepLeGATo and Morfometryka have a higher positive bias Single – Sérsic simulations yield best results always remaining below 4σ noise level Bulge – disk decompositions are more challenging as evident from residuals subtraction .

Conclusion

In conclusion, this paper's evaluation shows that reliable structural measurements can be achieved down to an apparent magnitude of about 23 in one component and 21 in two components using state -of -the art surface brightness fitting codes such as DeepLeGATo , Galapagos - 2 , Morfometryka , Profit ,and SourceXtractor ++ . The official Data Releases from Euclid are expected to deliver robust structural parameters for at least 400 million galaxies in its Wide Survey by end mission .

Created on 16 Jun. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

71.9%

Euclid preparation. XXV. The Euclid Morphology Challenge -- Towards model-fit…

astro-ph.GA

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look 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.