Table 5.
Comparison of bias, fraction of outliers, and accuracy between photo-z computed with CIRCLEZ, LEPHARE, and DNNZ, for extragalactic sources in the eROSITA/eFEDS field.
Survey | Number of sources | bias | accuracy | fraction of outliers |
---|---|---|---|---|
σNMAD | η [%] | |||
LEPHARE Region 1 | 3472 | 0.003 | 0.049 | 14.1 |
DNNZ Region 1 | 3419 | −0.001 | 0.039 | 16.7 |
LEPHARE Region 2 | 1884 | 0.006 | 0.068 | 23.8 |
DNNZ Region 2 | 1808 | −0.004 | 0.052 | 27.2 |
CIRCLEZ on test&validation | 2913 | −0.005 | 0.067 | 11.6 |
CIRCLEZ on training | 11 651 | −0.004 | 0.049 | 7.2 |
CIRCLEZ on training, test, and validation combined | 14 564 | −0.004 | 0.055 | 8.6 |
CIRCLEZ on eFEDS test&validation | 1913 | −0.006 | 0.068 | 11.9 |
CIRCLEZ on eFEDS training | 8032 | −0.004 | 0.052 | 7.8 |
CIRCLEZ on eFEDS all | 10 044 | −0.005 | 0.052 | 8.1 |
CIRCLEZ on CSC2 | 416 | −0.009 | 0.055 | 12.3 |
CIRCLEZ on Chandra-COSMOS Legacy | 1699 | −0.041 | 0.124 | 32.4 |
CIRCLEZ on Chandra-COSMOS Legacy i mag < 21.6 | 813 | −0.010 | 0.067 | 10.1 |
Notes. The values for LEPHARE and DNNZ are taken directly from Salvato et al. (2022) for comparison. While the selection of the templates for LEPHARE is based on the same sample used for assessing the quality of photo-zs, the training for DNNZ (CIRCLEZ) is partially (completely) independent from the test and validation sample used here. The quality of CIRCLEZ exceeds the one obtained by both LEPHARE and DNNZ in the area outside KiDS, demonstrating the strength of the method in general and particularly where there is a lack of NIR photometry.
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.