Table 4
Offsets of SFR(M⋆) relative to Karim et al. (2011).
| z | Nobj | SFR offset | rms |
|
|
|||
| 0.62 | 7 | −0.13 ± 0.16 | 0.35 |
| 1.15 | 121 | −0.33 ± 0.13 | 0.43 |
| 1.15 | 142 | −0.22 ± 0.16 | 0.52 |
| 1.85 | 191 | 0.26 ± 0.07 | 0.27 |
| 1.85 | 172 | 0.29 ± 0.07 | 0.27 |
|
|
|||
| All | 381 | 0.33 ± 0.05 | 0.32 |
| All | 382 | 0.35 ± 0.06 | 0.34 |
Notes. The first 5 lines report the offset of individual redshift sub-samples assuming for each the slope found by Karim et al. (2011). The last two are best fit offset of the entire sample assuming now a slope of 1.17 for the galaxies with mass below the mass completeness limit (109.4M⊙) of the Karim et al. (2011) sample. In both cases we repeat the fit using secondary redshifts for ELG 66 and 75 but no significant change is seen.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.