Results for the GoodsNorth catalogue

As of March 30, 2009, nine people replied to the GoodsNorth catalogue. In the following the results are presented in two ways:

• plots showing the spectroscopic redshift vs. the estimated redshift
• Mean and RMS values of the quantity Δz=(z_spec-z_phot)/(1+z_spec) together with outlier rates. We calculated the mean and the RMS of the redshift differences twice, once with an iterative 5-sigma outliers rejection and once rejecting all objects with Δz>0.15.

No cuts were applied to the various quality indicators put out by the different codes yet. Results are available for runs with the IRAC filters and without.

Assef, Roberto (LRT, template-based code, optimised for low-resolution templates, see Assef, et al. 2008):

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 1.5625% outliers, Δz=0.0406772 ⁺/_- 0.148245
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 14.8185% outliers, Δz=0.023843 ⁺/_- 0.0613788

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.57056% outliers, Δz=0.0807074 ⁺/_- 0.161043
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 18.8004% outliers, Δz=0.0383354 ⁺/_- 0.054773

Banerji, Manda (ANNz, neural-network code, see Collister & Lahav 2004):

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 0.544588% outliers, Δz=-0.0482978 ⁺/_- 0.179
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 31.0415% outliers, Δz=-0.00951374 ⁺/_- 0.0738864

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 0.476515% outliers, Δz=-0.0532808 ⁺/_- 0.211989
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 38.4615% outliers, Δz=-0.00556231 ⁺/_- 0.0775546

Brammer, Gabriel (EAZY, template-based code, see Brammer et al. 2008):

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 5.64516% outliers, Δz=0.0234559 ⁺/_- 0.0709821
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 11.6431% outliers, Δz=0.0202268 ⁺/_- 0.0418901

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 6.35081% outliers, Δz=0.0261558 ⁺/_- 0.0813256
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 13.5081% outliers, Δz=0.0223703 ⁺/_- 0.0418469

with IRAC and optimised templates (v1.1 with stronger emission lines)

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 5.39315% outliers, Δz=0.0191582 ⁺/_- 0.0729259
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 11.5423% outliers, Δz=0.0138125 ⁺/_- 0.0435903

without IRAC and optimised templates (v1.1 with stronger emission lines)

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 6.35081% outliers, Δz=0.018491 ⁺/_- 0.0783656
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 12.9536% outliers, Δz=0.0145033 ⁺/_- 0.0433486

with IRAC, v1.1 templates, and ZP re-calibration

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 5.54435% outliers, Δz=0.0113394 ⁺/_- 0.0721023
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 11.4415% outliers, Δz=0.00777358 ⁺/_- 0.0413093

without IRAC, v1.1 templates, and ZP re-calibration

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 6.70363% outliers, Δz=0.0126085 ⁺/_- 0.0717329
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 12.8024% outliers, Δz=0.00919505 ⁺/_- 0.0415742

Coe, Dan (BPZ, template-based code, see Benitez 2000):

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 4.78831% outliers, Δz=-0.0896461 ⁺/_- 0.132704
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 30.8972% outliers, Δz=-0.0455279 ⁺/_- 0.0597997

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 1.20968% outliers, Δz=0.034056 ⁺/_- 0.14018
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 11.4415% outliers, Δz=0.0114833 ⁺/_- 0.0484179

Kotulla, Ralf (GALEV, template-based code, see Kotulla et al. 2009)

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.46976% outliers, Δz=-0.0117004 ⁺/_- 0.221134
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 23.1351% outliers, Δz=-0.0087619 ⁺/_- 0.0611602

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.67137% outliers, Δz=0.0525261 ⁺/_- 0.181747
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 19.254% outliers, Δz=0.0163244 ⁺/_- 0.0589685

Li, Tornado (empirical code, polynomial fitting)

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 0.957661% outliers, Δz=-0.010874 ⁺/_- 0.151217
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 18.0444% outliers, Δz=-0.00866909 ⁺/_- 0.0524777

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 1.86492% outliers, Δz=0.00118059 ⁺/_- 0.112278
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 13.7097% outliers, Δz=-0.00661693 ⁺/_- 0.0514931

Miralles, Joan-Marc (Hyperz, template-based code, see Bolzonella et al. 2000):

with IRAC, CWW+SB template set

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.11694% outliers, Δz=-0.00741288 ⁺/_- 0.158381
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 18.498% outliers, Δz=-0.000784163 ⁺/_- 0.0579095

without IRAC, CWW+SB template set

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.21774% outliers, Δz=0.0377789 ⁺/_- 0.137954
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 14.6673% outliers, Δz=0.0181778 ⁺/_- 0.0550522

with IRAC, BC template set

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 6.55242% outliers, Δz=0.0128936 ⁺/_- 0.108801
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 17.0867% outliers, Δz=0.013188 ⁺/_- 0.0529754

without IRAC, BC template set

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 3.1754% outliers, Δz=0.0479351 ⁺/_- 0.158546
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 17.2883% outliers, Δz=0.0223649 ⁺/_- 0.0522287

Schmidt, Sam (krenel regression code & BPZ (see Benitez 2000)):

with IRAC, kernel regression

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.92339% outliers, Δz=-0.0157047 ⁺/_- 0.195503
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 19.6573% outliers, Δz=-0.00763554 ⁺/_- 0.0526371

without IRAC, kernel regression

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 0.957661% outliers, Δz=0.0212649 ⁺/_- 0.186027
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 16.6835% outliers, Δz=-0.00609671 ⁺/_- 0.0534582

with IRAC, BPZ

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 3.78024% outliers, Δz=-0.0297625 ⁺/_- 0.16172
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 21.8246% outliers, Δz=-0.0240051 ⁺/_- 0.0572546

without IRAC, BPZ

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 3.0746% outliers, Δz=0.0256138 ⁺/_- 0.146068
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 14.2641% outliers, Δz=0.00422547 ⁺/_- 0.0483947

Wolf, Chris (empirical χ²):

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 0.680735% outliers, Δz=-0.00288127 ⁺/_- 0.159163
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 18.4479% outliers, Δz=-0.0010163 ⁺/_- 0.0671926

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 1.42954% outliers, Δz=0.000393868 ⁺/_- 0.143632
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 16.7461% outliers, Δz=0.00175597 ⁺/_- 0.0658123

Cavuoti, Stefano et al. (neural network trained by a Quasi Newton rule, see Brescia et al. 2012 for model details); added 1 March 2012:

with IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.46976% outliers, Δz=-0.00238137 ⁺/_- 0.131203
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 16.3306% outliers, Δz=0.000604251 ⁺/_- 0.0562278

without IRAC

• z_spec vs. z_phot:
  

• statistics:
  • iterative 5-σ outlier rejection: 2.11694% outliers, Δz=-0.00700167 ⁺/_- 0.145979
  • Δz>0.15 outlier rejection: 19.3548% outliers, Δz=0.00277721 ⁺/_- 0.0626341

-- HendrikHildebrandt - 1 March 2012