1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2004 January 9
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
19:
20: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
21:
22: %% \documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
23:
24: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
25:
26: %% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
27:
28: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
29: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
30: %% use the longabstract style option.
31:
32: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
33:
34: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
35: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
36: %% the \begin{document} command.
37: %%
38: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
39: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
40: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
41: %% for information.
42:
43: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
44: \newcommand{\myemail}{s.serjeant@kent.ac.uk}
45:
46: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
47:
48: %\slugcomment{Not to appear in Nonlearned J., 45.}
49:
50: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
51: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
52: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
53: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
54: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
55: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
56:
57: \shorttitle{Sub-mm detections of Spitzer populations}
58: \shortauthors{Serjeant et al.}
59:
60: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
61: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
62:
63: %\received{2004 March 31}
64: \begin{document}
65:
66: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
67: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
68: %% you desire.
69:
70: \title{Sub-millimeter detections of
71: {\it Spitzer Space Telescope} galaxy populations}
72: %\title{Collapsed Cores in Globular Clusters, \\
73: % Gauge-Boson Couplings, and AAS\TeX\ Examples}
74:
75: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
76: %% author and affiliation information.
77: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
78: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
79: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
80: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
81:
82: %\author{S. Djorgovski\altaffilmark{1,2,3} and Ivan R. King\altaffilmark{1}}
83: %\affil{Astronomy Department, University of California,
84: % Berkeley, CA 94720}
85:
86: \author{
87: S.\ Serjeant,\altaffilmark{1}
88: A.\,M.\,J.\ Mortier,\altaffilmark{1}
89: R.\,J.\ Ivison,\altaffilmark{2}
90: E.\ Egami,\altaffilmark{3}
91: G.\,H.\ Rieke,\altaffilmark{3}
92: S.\,P.\ Willner,\altaffilmark{4}
93: D.\ Rigopoulou,\altaffilmark{6}
94: A.\ Alonso-Herrero,\altaffilmark{3}
95: P.\ Barmby,\altaffilmark{4}
96: L.\ Bei,\altaffilmark{3}
97: H.\ Dole,\altaffilmark{3,8}
98: C.\,W.\ Engelbracht,\altaffilmark{3}
99: G.\,G.\ Fazio,\altaffilmark{4}
100: E.\ Le Floc'h,\altaffilmark{3}
101: K.\,D.\ Gordon,\altaffilmark{3}
102: T.\ R.\ Greve,\altaffilmark{5}
103: D.\,C.\ Hines,\altaffilmark{3,10}
104: J.\,-S.\ Huang,\altaffilmark{4}
105: K.\,A.\ Misselt,\altaffilmark{3}
106: S.\ Miyazaki,\altaffilmark{9}
107: J.\,E.\ Morrison,\altaffilmark{3}
108: C.\ Papovich,\altaffilmark{3}
109: P.\,G.\ P\'{e}rez-Gonz\'{a}lez,\altaffilmark{3}
110: M.\,J.\ Rieke,\altaffilmark{3}
111: J.\ Rigby,\altaffilmark{3}
112: G.\ Wilson\altaffilmark{7}
113: }
114:
115: \altaffiltext{1}{Centre for Astrophysics \& Planetary Science, School
116: of Physical Sciences, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NR, UK}
117: \altaffiltext{2}{Astronomy Technology Centre, Royal Observatory,
118: Blackford Hill, Edinburgh, EH9 3HJ, UK}
119: \altaffiltext{3}{Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, 933 N
120: Cherry Avenue, Tuscon, AZ, 85721}
121: \altaffiltext{4}{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60
122: Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138}
123: \altaffiltext{5}{Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh,
124: Blackford Hill, Edinburgh, EH9 3HJ, UK}
125: \altaffiltext{6}{Astrophysics, Denys Wilson Building, Keble Road,
126: Oxford, OX1 3RH, UK}
127: \altaffiltext{7}{Spitzer Science Center, California Institute of
128: Technology, Mail Code 220-6, 1200 East California Boulevard, Pasadena,
129: CA 91125}
130: \altaffiltext{8}{IAS, bat 121, Universite Paris-Sud,
131: F-91405 Orsay cedex, France}
132: \altaffiltext{9}{Subaru Telescope, National Astronomical Observatory
133: of Japan, 650 North A'ohoku Place, Hilo, HI 96720}
134: \altaffiltext{10}{Space Science Institute, 4750 Walnut Street, Suite
135: 205, Boulder, Colorado 80301}
136: \setcounter{footnote}{11}
137:
138: %\author{C. D. Biemesderfer\altaffilmark{4,5}}
139: %\affil{National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ 85719}
140: %\email{aastex-help@aas.org}
141: %
142: %\and
143: %
144: %\author{R. J. Hanisch\altaffilmark{5}}
145: %\affil{Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, MD 21218}
146: %
147: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
148: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
149: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
150: %% affiliation.
151:
152: %\altaffiltext{1}{Visiting Astronomer, Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory.
153: %CTIO is operated by AURA, Inc.\ under contract to the National Science
154: %Foundation.}
155: %\altaffiltext{2}{Society of Fellows, Harvard University.}
156: %\altaffiltext{3}{present address: Center for Astrophysics,
157: % 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138}
158: %\altaffiltext{4}{Visiting Programmer, Space Telescope Science Institute}
159: %\altaffiltext{5}{Patron, Alonso's Bar and Grill}
160:
161: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
162: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
163: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
164: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
165: %% editorial office after submission.
166:
167: \begin{abstract}
168: We present
169: sub-millimeter statistical detections of
170: galaxies discovered in the $5'\times5'$ Spitzer Early Release
171: Observations (to $\sim4-15\mu$Jy $5\sigma$ at $3.6-8\mu$m,
172: $170\mu$Jy at $24\mu$m)
173: through a stacking analysis of
174: our reanalysed SCUBA 8mJy survey maps, and a Spitzer
175: identification of a new sub-millimeter
176: point source in the 8mJy survey region.
177: For sources detected at $5.8\mu$m or $8\mu$m ($154$ and $111$ sources
178: respectively),
179: we detect positive skews in the sub-millimeter flux distributions
180: at $99.2-99.8\%$ confidence using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, at both
181: $850\mu$m and $450\mu$m. We also marginally detect the {\it Spitzer}
182: $24\mu$m galaxies at $850\mu$m at $97\%$ confidence, and place
183: limits on the mean sub-millimeter fluxes of the $3.6\mu$m and
184: $4.5\mu$m sources.
185: %We also detect
186: %positive mean deflections at the $2-5\sigma$ level for sources
187: %selected in each of the Spitzer bands,
188: %in both sub-millimeter bands.
189: Integrating the sub-millimeter fluxes of the {\it Spitzer}
190: populations, we find the $5.8\mu$m galaxies
191: contribute
192: $0.12\pm0.05$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$ to the
193: $850\mu$m background, and
194: $2.4\pm0.7$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$ to the
195: $450\mu$m background; similar contributions
196: are made by the $8\mu$m-selected sample.
197: We infer that the populations dominating the $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m
198: extragalactic background light also contribute around a quarter of
199: the $850\mu$m background and the majority of the $450\mu$m background.
200: \end{abstract}
201:
202: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
203: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
204: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
205: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
206:
207: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
208: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so in the
209: %% subject header. Objects should be in the appropriate "individual"
210: %% headers (e.g. quasars: individual, stars: individual, etc.) with the
211: %% additional provision that the total number of headers, including each
212: %% individual object, not exceed six. The \objectname{} macro, and its
213: %% alias \object{}, is used to mark each object. The macro takes the object
214: %% name as its primary argument. This name will appear in the paper
215: %% and serve as the link's anchor in the electronic edition if the name
216: %% is recognized by the data centers. The macro also takes an optional
217: %% argument in parentheses in cases where the data center identification
218: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper.
219:
220: %\keywords{cosmology: observations --- galaxies: evolution --- galaxies: formation --- submillimeter --- infrared: galaxies --- galaxies: high-redshift}
221:
222: \keywords{cosmology: observations --- galaxies: evolution ---
223: galaxies: formation}
224:
225: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
226: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
227: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
228: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
229: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
230: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
231: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
232: %% each reference.
233:
234:
235: \section{Introduction}
236:
237: The early pioneering sub-millimeter surveys in lensing clusters
238: (Smail, Ivison \& Blain 1997)
239: and in blank fields (Hughes et al. 1998, Barger et al. 1998)
240: demonstrated the feasibility
241: of deep extragalactic surveys
242: exploiting the favorable K-corrections in the sub-millimeter.
243: %to
244: %select high redshift dust-shrouded galaxies.
245: Deep $850\mu$m imaging has now resolved around half
246: of the $850\mu$m extragalactic background (Hughes et
247: al. 1998, Blain et al. 1999, Cowie, Barger \& Kneib 2002).
248: These galaxies are
249: %The selection function of these galaxies,
250: often called SCUBA galaxies after the instrument with which they were
251: first detected (Holland et al. 1999).
252: %, famously
253: %extends almost uniformly from $z\sim1$ to $z\sim10$ (Blain \& Longair
254: %1996).
255: The $14''$ $850\mu$m SCUBA beam makes identifications at other
256: wavelengths difficult; nevertheless, $\sim50\%$ of $850\mu$m sources are
257: identifiable in $\mu$Jy $1.4$GHz imaging (Ivison et al. 2002). These radio
258: identifications have led to
259: optical identifications, morphologies and ultimately spectroscopic
260: redshifts in multiwavelength follow-up campaigns (e.g. Chapman et
261: al. 2003). Furthermore,
262: the non-detection of SCUBA galaxies in hard X-ray imaging
263: (e.g. Alexander et al. 2003)
264: %requires any
265: %bolometrically-dominant active nuclei to be Compton-thick, and
266: suggests that the bulk of the population has far-infrared luminosities
267: dominated by star formation. The morphologies, redshifts,
268: clustering and molecular gas contents are so far consistent with at
269: least some of the SCUBA population being the progenitors of giant
270: elliptical galaxies (e.g. Dunlop 2002), though other
271: alternatives are still viable (Efstathiou \& Rowan-Robinson 2003) and
272: the SCUBA population is heterogeneous (e.g. Ivison et
273: al. 1998, 2000).
274: Finally, the K-correction effects in the
275: sub-millimeter make the sub-millimeter extragalactic background
276: sensitive to contributions from the far-infrared luminous energy
277: densities at all redshifts $z\stackrel{<}{_\sim}10$. The
278: populations which contribute to the $850\mu$m extragalactic background
279: are necessarily also significant contributors to the
280: cosmic history of dust-shrouded star formation.
281:
282: %Despite the
283: %selection function, the median redshift of SCUBA galaxies appears to
284: %be around $z\sim2.5$ (Chapman et al. 2003). However, this generates
285: %its own problems, for example in overproducing $\Omega_\ast$
286: %(e.g. Blain et al., Serjeant \& Harrison 2003) unless the initial mass
287: %function was top-heavy at high redshift (Larson 1998) or a much higher
288: %fraction of star formation occured in ultraluminous systems at high
289: %redshift.
290: %, STUFF LINKING THIS TO THE RADIO BACKGD FROM STARBURSTS.
291: %Note that the redshift distributions of galaxies dominating the
292: %extragalactic background light depend strongly on the wavelength of
293: %that light: for example,
294: %the $850\mu$m background is sensitive to contributions
295: %from the sub-millimeter luminosity density throughout
296: %$z\stackrel{<}{_\sim}10$
297: %as a result of the propitious K-corrections,
298: %unlike e.g. the $140\mu$m or $15\mu$m extragalactic background light
299: %(e.g. Elbaz paper).
300:
301: Following the {\it IRAS} mid-infrared surveys of the local Universe
302: (e.g. Rush, Malkan \& Spinoglio 1993), the mid-infrared was first made
303: accessible
304: to deep extragalactic surveys by the Infrared Space Observatory ({\it ISO},
305: Kessler et al. 1996) which conducted a suite of surveys with a variety
306: of depths and areal coverages (e.g. Genzel \& Cesarsky 2000 and
307: refs. therein, Rowan-Robinson et al. 2004). The
308: rapid upturn in the $15\mu$m extragalactic source counts clearly
309: demonstrated the existence of a strongly evolving population of
310: obscured starbursts and active galaxies (e.g. Serjeant et al. 2000,
311: Franceschini et
312: al. 2001, Gruppioni et al. 2002). It has also been
313: argued that the populations dominating the $15\mu$m extragalactic
314: background light, which are resolved by {\it ISO}, are also largely the same
315: populations which dominate the unresolved $140\mu$m background
316: (Elbaz et al. 2002). If correct, this is a significant
317: breakthrough in determining the populations which dominated the
318: far-infrared luminous energy density throughout the relatively
319: recent history of the Universe (e.g. $z<1$).
320:
321: Finding the population that supplies the luminous energy density
322: at $z>1$ requires understanding the sub-millimeter background light.
323: %Extending this to higher redshifts requires consideration of the
324: %sub-millimeter extragalactic background light.
325: However,
326: it has been difficult to find sub-millimeter source counterparts in
327: the mid-infrared.
328: %the links between the mid-infrared and
329: %sub-millimeter backgrounds have been
330: %less clear.
331: Very few sub-millimeter-selected sources have
332: been detected by {\it ISO} in the mid-infrared
333: %and the exceptions are
334: %often local galaxies ($z\stackrel{<}{_\sim}1$,
335: (e.g. Eales et al. 2000, Webb et al. 2003b, Sato et al. 2002).
336: The reverse procedure of looking for mid-infrared sources in the
337: sub-millimeter via stacking analyses have not fared much better.
338: Serjeant et al. (2003a) found no excess $850\mu$m flux at the
339: locations of $15\mu$m sources in the HDF North.
340: %Stacking analyses have not fared much better:
341: %Serjeant et
342: %al. (2003a) found the {\it ISO} $15\mu$m populations in the Hubble Deep Field
343: %North SCUBA image to be undetected in the $850\mu$m
344: %map.
345: Lyman break galaxies, in contrast, are detectable statistically
346: (e.g. Peacock et al. 2000, Webb et al. 2003a). If SCUBA galaxies
347: are extreme star-forming galaxies in the most massive high-redshift
348: halos,
349: then their anomalously faint K-band identifications imply heavy
350: obscuration in the observed-frame near-infrared
351: (Serjeant et al. 2003b), suggesting that SCUBA galaxies
352: may be detectable in $\mu$Jy-level mid-infrared imaging.
353:
354: The {\it Spitzer Space Telescope} (hereafter {\it Spitzer}, Werner et
355: al. 2004) is an
356: enormous advance over {\it ISO} in terms
357: of mapping speed, sensitivity, and wavelength coverage.
358: It may now be possible to resolve the bulk of the
359: extragalactic background light at
360: $3.6-8\mu$m in exposures of the order $15$ minutes, an equivalent
361: depth achieved at $6.7\mu$m in $23$ hours with {\it ISO} by Sato et
362: al. 2003. In this paper we present statistical sub-millimeter
363: detections of galaxies selected in a new {\it Spitzer} survey.
364: The {\it Spitzer} identifications of previously-published
365: sub-millimeter
366: sources are discussed by Egami et
367: al. (2004).
368: %Other papers in this volume present the implications of
369: %some of the other multiwavelength data:
370: Identifications of MAMBO sources are discussed by Ivison
371: et al. (2004).
372: %identifications of $\mu$Jy radio sources are
373: %presented by BLAH;
374: %X-ray sources by Alonso-Herrero et al. (2004);
375: %Extremely Red Objects by Wilson et
376: %al. (2004); photometric redshifts by Le Floc'h et
377: %al. (2004) and IRAC colors by Huang et al. (2004).
378:
379: %In this letter we present an identification of a new sub-millimeter
380: %source discovered in our reanalysis of the 8mJy survey (Mortier et
381: %al. 2004), and a sub-millimeter
382: %stacking analysis of the {\it Spitzer} source
383: %catalogs which links the populations dominating the
384: %$5.8-8\mu$m extragalactic background light with those dominating the
385: %$450\mu$m and $850\mu$m backgrounds.
386: %We assume a cosmology with $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.3$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.7$
387: %and $H_0=70$\,km\,s$^{-1}$\,Mpc$^{-1}$.
388:
389: %
390: %
391: %
392: \section{Observations}
393: The {\it Spitzer} Early Release Observations survey is
394: one of the first extragalactic surveys conducted by {\it
395: Spitzer}. Besides the pragmatic goal of
396: characterising the survey capabilities of the facility, the
397: survey has the science goals of making the first constraints on the
398: populations which dominate the extragalactic backgrounds in the
399: shorter wavelength {\it Spitzer} bands, and the links between these
400: galaxies and other known populations.
401: Accordingly, the survey field was selected to lie in
402: the Lockman Hole, an area with abundant multi-wavelength survey coverage,
403: and in particular with $7$ galaxies from the
404: $850\mu$m 8mJy survey $>3.5\sigma$ catalog
405: (Scott et al. 2002, Fox et al. 2002, Ivison et al. 2002; see below).
406:
407: The {\it Spitzer} imaging is described by Egami et al. (2004) and
408: Huang et al. (2004). In summary, IRAC (Fazio et al. 2004) imaged a
409: $\sim5'\times5'$ field
410: for $750$s per sky pixel at all four bands, resulting in median
411: $1\sigma$ depths of $0.77\mu$Jy, $0.78\mu$Jy, $2.75\mu$Jy and
412: $1.67\mu$Jy at $3.6\mu$m, $4.5\mu$m, $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m
413: respectively, and sources were extracted to $>4.7\sigma$. MIPS
414: (Rieke et al. 2004)
415: observed the field in photometry mode
416: at $24\mu$m for $250$s per sky pixel, resulting in a typical $1\sigma$
417: depth of $30\mu$Jy. Source confusion and blending make the MIPS
418: completeness and reliability more problematic than for SCUBA or IRAC.
419: MIPS source catalogs were
420: extracted to $>170\mu$Jy ($80\%$ complete, $>90\%$ reliable) and
421: to $>120\mu$Jy ($50\%$ complete, $50\%$ reliable). We conservatively
422: assume the catalogs are all extragalactic, as expected at these flux
423: densities; the deletion of any (hypothetical)
424: contaminant population of galactic
425: stars with negligible sub-millimeter fluxes
426: would improve the confidence levels of our statistical detections.
427:
428: The SCUBA 8mJy survey data (which covers all our {\it Spitzer} field)
429: is described in detail by Scott et
430: al. (2002). We have reanalysed this data, modelling the intra-night
431: SCUBA gain variations, improving the extinction corrections using
432: improved fits to
433: %the short timescale variations of
434: the $225$GHz skydips monitored at
435: the Caltech Sub-millimeter Observatory, and removing the cross-talking
436: $450\mu$m bolometers A7 and A16 (see Mortier et
437: al. 2004). Additional sources are detectable in the
438: zero-sum chopped/nodded
439: sub-millimeter maps. After point source detection using
440: noise-weighted PSF convolution
441: (Serjeant et al. 2003a)
442: including the effect of negative
443: chop/nod positions,
444: the median $1\sigma$ depth (total flux) in the {\it Spitzer} Early
445: Release Observations field is $1.6$mJy at $850\mu$m, and $14.4$mJy at
446: $450\mu$m.
447:
448: \section{Results}
449: %\subsection{{\it Spitzer} identification of a new sub-millimeter source}
450: \label{sec:ids}
451: Our reanalysis of the SCUBA 8mJy survey uncovered new candidate
452: sub-millimeter sources
453: %at both $450\mu$m and $850\mu$m
454: (Mortier et
455: al. 2004). Figure \ref{fig:ids} shows the {\it Spitzer}
456: identifications of the most significant of these, at $\alpha=10^{\rm
457: h}$ $51^{\rm m}$ $53.94^{\rm s}$, $\delta=+57^\circ$ $25'$
458: $05.5''$ (J2000),
459: % This source is
460: detected with
461: a $3.7\sigma$ $850\mu$m flux
462: of $4.3$mJy. At $450\mu$m the source is not detected, though
463: the $450\mu$m flux at its position is $17.9$mJy ($1.6\sigma$); there
464: is also a hint of positive flux at $1.8\sigma$ significance at
465: $1250\mu$m (Greve et al. 2004) at the position of this source.
466: There are hints that the source is extended at $850\mu$m, suggesting a
467: blend of more than one source, and indeed there are two candidate
468: identifications in the {\it Spitzer} imaging.
469: The probabilities of a
470: random association ($P=1-\exp(-n(>s)\pi r^2)$ where $n(>s)$ is the
471: surface density of catalogued objects brighter than the
472: identification at distance $r$) are $0.033$ and $0.155$ for the
473: brighter and fainter $4.5\mu$m flux respectively.
474: Interestingly, the
475: low-significance contours of $450\mu$m emission are coincident with
476: the brighter of the two candidates.
477: The {\it Spitzer} fluxes of this source
478: are $16.6$, $26.7$, $14.9$, $18.9\mu$Jy and $216\mu$Jy at $3.6\mu$m,
479: $4.5\mu$m, $5.8\mu$m, $8\mu$m and $24\mu$m respectively. The fluxes of
480: the second
481: candidate identification are $6.2\mu$Jy and $4.6\mu$Jy at $3.6\mu$m,
482: and $4.5\mu$m, but the source is not detected at longer wavelength
483: {\it Spitzer} bands. While deblending the fluxes from the two
484: identifications is beyond the scope of this paper, it is interesting
485: to note that either identification would have a sub-millimeter:{\it
486: Spitzer} flux ratio which is redder than
487: %the ratio
488: in the population as a whole, derived below.
489:
490: %\subsection{Sub-millimeter stacking analysis}
491: %\label{sec:stacking}
492: The $>3.5\sigma$ sub-millimeter sources are already known to have {\it
493: Spitzer} identifications (Egami et al. 2004),
494: so
495: %it is necessary to
496: we
497: construct a mask to remove the sources at these positions from
498: %consideration in
499: the stacking analysis.
500: %For the
501: At $850\mu$m
502: %stacking analysis,
503: we masked a $9.9''$ radius ($\sqrt{2}\times$ the SCUBA FWHM, i.e. the
504: FWHM of point sources in our PSF-convolved maps)
505: around the $>3.5\sigma$ $850\mu$m point
506: sources from Scott
507: et al. (2002), as well as the new point sources from our
508: reanalysis (Mortier et al. 2004).
509: %For the
510: At
511: $450\mu$m
512: %stacking analysis,
513: the masking radius was $5.2''$,
514: which we also applied to
515: new $450\mu$m sources
516: from our reanalysis.
517: % which are not detected at $850\mu$m.
518: We also masked regions with high noise
519: levels, arbitrarily selected as
520: $>5$mJy at $850\mu$m, or $>100$mJy at $450\mu$m, and
521: also masked all regions in the sub-millimeter maps
522: without {\it Spitzer} data.
523: % at each of the
524: %wavelengths being considered.
525: The unmasked area at $850\mu$m ($450\mu$m) is $22.1$
526: ($22.7$) arcmin$^2$ for the IRAC catalogues. For MIPS, the
527: corresponding area is $27.6$ ($28.5$) arcmin$^2$.
528:
529: The sub-millimeter maps give the best-fit point source flux at
530: each location (equation A4 of Serjeant et al. 2003a), so we
531: measure the values of the sub-millimeter images at the {\it Spitzer}
532: galaxy positions.
533: Figure \ref{fig:histograms} shows the sub-millimeter
534: signal-to-noise ratios (equation A6 of Serjeant et al. 2003a)
535: at the positions of the {\it Spitzer}
536: Early Release Observations source catalogs at $5.8\mu$m and
537: $8\mu$m, which lie in the unmasked regions.
538: These figures also show
539: %signal-to-noise
540: histograms
541: for
542: %of
543: the whole of the unmasked maps.
544: %regions.
545: Note the clear positive
546: skews in the sub-millimeter fluxes at the {\it Spitzer} source positions,
547: relative to
548: %the distribution in
549: the maps as a whole. We used
550: Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests to determine the confidence level of these
551: relative positive skews,
552: %which are
553: listed in table~\ref{tab:coadd_results}.
554: There are significant detections at $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m, and
555: marginal detections at $24\mu$m.
556: No significant skew was found at $3.6\mu$m or $4.5\mu$m.
557: %provided the known sub-millimeter point sources were masked. However,
558: %with the masking of sub-millimeter point sources disabled,
559: %all {\it Spitzer} bands had positive skews at BLAH confidence.
560: %This serves to demonstrate the reality of at least some of the
561: %point source identifications presented by Egami et al. (2004).
562:
563: We also calculated the mean fluxes in the sub-millimeter
564: maps at the positions of the {\it Spitzer} galaxies. These are almost
565: all positive and are listed
566: in table \ref{tab:coadd_results}. This statistic is less efficient
567: than the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (which does not just use the first
568: moment), so the uncertainties on the mean
569: fluxes are larger than suggested by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov
570: confidence levels.
571: The {\it Spitzer}
572: galaxies are individually undetected in the sub-millimeter,
573: so one must be careful in
574: interpreting the stacking analysis; for example,
575: we do not use the {\it noise-weighted} mean
576: fluxes because they can give false
577: positives, as noted by Serjeant et al. 2003a.
578: %(though the mean
579: %signal-to-noise levels are not biased).
580: Also, many
581: %of the
582: fluctuations in the
583: sub-millimeter maps are blends (e.g. Scott et al. 2002), so is there a
584: risk of overestimating the flux of any given {\it Spitzer} galaxy by
585: also counting its neighbors? The answer is no, as Peacock et
586: al. (2000) showed: for a Poissonian sampling of the sub-millimeter
587: map, the expected total sub-millimeter flux from all neighbors equals
588: the mean flux of the map, which is exactly zero for the chopped,
589: nodded SCUBA maps. (The chopped/nodded PSF is also zero-sum, so the
590: PSF-convolved images are still zero-sum.)
591: Blending slightly degrades the uncertainty on the
592: mean, but it does not affect the mean fluxes.
593: Another demonstration of this is to note that the total flux of any
594: given source is exactly zero in these chopped, nodded maps. Even
595: confusing sources within the same SCUBA beam will have no {\it net}
596: effect, provided that there are also
597: similar sources uniformly distributed over the rest of the map.
598:
599: The histograms of the whole map in figure \ref{fig:histograms}
600: effectively act as the control sample. Nevertheless, as a test of the
601: stacking analysis methodology, we performed the same tests on
602: simulated {\it Spitzer} catalogs of the same size as the observed
603: catalogs,
604: %and
605: with a Poissonian distribution in the unmasked
606: regions.
607: %As expected,
608: No positive skews in the sub-millimeter flux
609: distributions were detected relative to the maps as a whole. These
610: simulations also verified that the mean sub-millimeter flux
611: around randomly chosen positions is consistent with zero.
612:
613: \section{Discussion}
614:
615: Although our {\it Spitzer} $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m catalogues are small
616: ($154$ and $111$ respectively), we can use our statistical detections to
617: obtain
618: %some
619: constraints
620: on the contribution to the sub-millimeter
621: extragalactic background light from the {\it Spitzer} populations, by
622: multiplying the mean sub-millimeter flux of a single {\it Spitzer} galaxy
623: (table \ref{tab:coadd_results}) with the observed surface
624: density of {\it Spitzer} galaxies.
625: %by integrating the {\it Spitzer} flux per unit solid angle in the
626: %observed populations, and using the mean sub-millimeter:{\it Spitzer}
627: %flux ratios listed in table \ref{tab:coadd_results}.
628: At $850\mu$m, the
629: integrated contribution from the $5.8\mu$m population is $0.12\pm0.05$
630: nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$, and from the (overlapping) $8\mu$m population
631: $0.10\pm0.04$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$. This is already comparable to the
632: total $850\mu$m extragalactic background reported by Lagache et
633: al. (2000) of $\sim0.5$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$. At $450\mu$m the
634: {\it Spitzer} contributions can, within the uncertainties, account
635: for all the observed $\sim3$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$ extragalactic
636: background: $2.4\pm0.7$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$ from the $5.8\mu$m-selected
637: sample, and $2.2\pm0.6$ nW m$^{-2}$ sr$^{-1}$ from the $8\mu$m galaxies.
638: Our sub-millimeter faint source density is consistent with those in
639: the deepest $850\mu$m maps (Cowie et al. 2002).
640:
641: The sub-millimeter:{\it Spitzer} flux ratios in sub-millimeter point
642: sources (Egami et al. 2004, see above) are much higher
643: than average in the population (table \ref{tab:coadd_results}).
644: Despite the commonality between the SCUBA and {\it Spitzer} galaxy
645: populations,
646: sub-millimeter galaxies are not at all representative of
647: the {\it Spitzer} population. The sub-millimeter background
648: independently suggests the same result:
649: if the $24\mu$m population had
650: sub-millimeter:{\it Spitzer} flux ratios as high as SCUBA galaxies
651: (e.g. median
652: $S_{850\mu{\rm m}}/S_{24\mu{\rm m}}=34.4$ for the Egami et al. (2004)
653: sample), the $>170\mu$Jy $24\mu$m sources alone
654: would over-predict the $850\mu$m background by
655: $\sim60\%$. Our weak sub-millimeter detection of the $24\mu$m population
656: is less surprising in that context. One possible interpretation is
657: that the SCUBA population has fewer (or more heavily obscured) active
658: nuclei than the {\it Spitzer} population as a whole.
659:
660: Is our stacking analysis signal due to dusty galaxies, or to
661: high-$z$
662: %redshift
663: galaxies, or both? Our samples are too small to distinguish
664: these possibilities, but stacking analyses of subsets show that
665: either option is credible. Almost all the $5.8\mu$m galaxies are detected at
666: $3.6\mu$m, and as with the $5.8\mu$m population as whole
667: (table \ref{tab:coadd_results})
668: this subset ($153$ galaxies) is detected statistically.
669: The $299$ remaining $3.6\mu$m galaxies are not detected in the stacking
670: analyses (e.g., only $37\%$ confidence in the $450\mu$m signal:noise
671: maps), so the redder galaxies are more likely to be sub-millimeter
672: emitters. The lack of a stacking signal at $3.6\mu$m and $4.5\mu$m is
673: at least in part due to dilution of the signal from the high density
674: of bluer galaxies detected at these wavelengths. The red colors could
675: be due to heavy obscuration, but the colors also become redder quickly
676: with increasing redshift.
677: %However, the colors also depend strongly on redshift.
678: Simpson
679: \& Eisenhardt (1999) show that $F_{4.5\mu\rm m}/F_{3.6\mu\rm m}>1.32$
680: or $F_{8\mu\rm m}/F_{5.8\mu\rm m}>1.32$ selects redshifts
681: $z\stackrel{>}{_\sim}1.5$. There are $47$ galaxies satisfying either
682: criteria, with detections in the relevant bands, and these galaxies
683: are detected in the stacking analysis (e.g. $99.1\%$ confidence at
684: $450\mu$m); the corresponding $400$ foreground
685: $z\stackrel{<}{_\sim}1.5$
686: galaxies are not detected (e.g. only $71\%$ confidence at
687: $450\mu$m). Further work on larger samples is needed to
688: discriminate between high-redshift and high-obscuration
689: sub-populations.
690:
691: The sub-millimeter backgrounds are sensitive to contributions
692: from the far-infrared luminous energy densities throughout the
693: redshift range of favorable K-corrections. It follows that the {\it
694: Spitzer} $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m-selected galaxies are necessarily
695: significant contributors to the comoving volume averaged star
696: formation density.
697: %When taken in the context of the {\it Spitzer}
698: %identifications of sub-millimeter galaxies (Egami et al. 2004, section
699: %\ref{sec:ids}), it appears that there is a substantial degree of
700: %commonality between the SCUBA and {\it Spitzer} galaxy populations.
701: Many of the $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m galaxies are challenging targets for
702: 8-10m-class optical/near-infrared spectroscopy, but redshift surveys
703: of these populations, together with 2-D and 3-D clustering, would
704: discriminate between competing semi-analytic descriptions of galaxy
705: evolution, and determine whether (or which) SCUBA/{\it Spitzer}
706: galaxies are the sites of the assembly of giant ellipticals.
707: Finally, it is worth stressing that the conclusions in this paper
708: could only have been reached with co-ordinated multi-wavelength
709: surveys.
710: %The evidence for
711: %sub-populations with much higher sub-millimeter:{\it Spitzer} flux ratios
712: %%(e.g. Egami et al. 2004, figure \ref{fig:ids})
713: %than the population as
714: %a whole
715: %%(table \ref{tab:coadd_results})
716: %demonstrates that
717: %sampling the whole of the spectral energy distribution can be
718: %critical to the physical interpretation.
719:
720:
721: %
722: %
723: %
724:
725:
726: %
727: %
728: %
729: \acknowledgments{
730: We would like to thank the referee, Yasunori Sato, for many thoughtful
731: and useful comments.
732: This work is based in part on observations made with the {\em Spitzer
733: Space Telescope},
734: (\facility{Spitzer(IRAC),Spitzer(MIPS)}, dataset
735: \dataset{ads/sa.spitzer 6620160,6619904})
736: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
737: California Institute of Technology under NASA contract 1407.
738: Support for this work was provided by NASA through Contract Number
739: \#960785
740: and \#1256790
741: issued by JPL/Caltech.
742: %, and an award issued by
743: %JPL/Caltech.
744: }
745: %JCMT acknowledgements... PPARC acknowledgements... Nuffield
746: %acknowledgements...
747:
748: %
749: %
750: %
751: \begin{thebibliography}{}
752:
753: \bibitem[]{742} Alexander, D.M., et al.\ 2003, AJ, 125, 383
754:
755: %\bibitem[]{744} Alonso-Herrero, A., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
756:
757: %\bibitem[]{746} Bertoldi, F., et al.\ 2000, A\&A, 360, 92
758:
759: %\bibitem[]{748} Blain, A.W., Longair, M.S., 1996, MNRAS 279, 847
760:
761: \bibitem[]{750} Blain, A.W., Kneib, J.-P., Ivison, R.J., \& Smail, I.\ 1999, ApJ, 512, L87
762:
763: %\bibitem[]{752} Blain, A.W., Chapman, S.C., Smail, I., \& Ivison, R.J.\ 2004a, ApJ, submitted
764: % Clustering
765:
766: %\bibitem[]{755} Blain, A.W., Chapman, S.C., Smail, I., \& Ivison, R.J.\ 2004b, ApJ, submitted
767: % Spitzer
768:
769: \bibitem[]{758} Barger, A.J., et al., 1998, Nature, 394, 248
770:
771: \bibitem[]{760} Chapman, S.C., Blain, A.W., Ivison, R.J., \& Smail, I.\ 2003, Nature, 422, 695
772:
773: %\bibitem[]{762} Chapman, S.C., Blain, A.W., Smail, I., \& Ivison, R.J.\ 2004, ApJ, in preparation
774:
775: %\bibitem[]{764} Conselice, C.J., Chapman, S.C., \& Windhorst, R.A.\ 2003, ApJ, 596, L5
776:
777: \bibitem[]{766} Cowie, L.L., Barger, A.J., \& Kneib, J.-P.\ 2002, AJ, 123, 2197
778:
779: %\bibitem[]{768} Dole, H., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
780:
781: \bibitem[]{770} Dunlop, J.S., 2002 in
782: %{\it A New Era In Cosmology},
783: ASP conference proceedings vol. 283, eds. T. Shanks and N. Metcalfe,
784: San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific (astro-ph/0203183)
785:
786: %\bibitem[]{775} Dunlop, J.S., et al.\ 2004, MNRAS, in press (astro-ph/0205480)
787:
788: \bibitem[]{777} Eales, S., et al., 2000, AJ, 120, 2244
789:
790: %\bibitem[]{779} Eales, S.A., Bertoldi, F., Ivison, R.J., Carilli, C.L., Dunne, L., \& Owen, F.N.\ 2003, MNRAS, 344, 169
791:
792: \bibitem[]{781} Efstathiou, A., \& Rowan-Robinson, M., 2003, MNRAS, 343, 322
793:
794: \bibitem[]{783} Egami, E., et al., 2004, ApJS, this issue
795:
796: \bibitem[]{785} Elbaz, D., Cesarsky, C.J., Chanial, P., Aussel, H.,
797: Franceschini, A., Fadda, D., Chary, R.R., 2002, A\&A, 384, 848
798:
799: \bibitem[]{788} Fazio, G.G., et al., 2004, ApJS, this issue
800:
801: \bibitem[]{790} Fox, M., et al., 2002, MNRAS, 331, 839
802:
803: \bibitem[]{792} Franceschini, A., Aussel, H., Cesarsky, C.J., Elbaz, D.,
804: Fadda, D., 2001, A\&A, 378, 1
805:
806: \bibitem[]{795} Genzel, R., Cesarsky, C.J., 2000, ARA\&A, 38, 761
807:
808: %\bibitem[]{797} Greve, T.R., et al.\ 2004a, ApJ, in preparation % CO survey
809:
810: \bibitem[]{799} Greve, T.R., et al.\ 2004, MNRAS, in preparation % MAMBO survey
811:
812: \bibitem[]{801} Gruppioni, C., Lari, C., Pozzi, F., Zamorani, G.,
813: Franceschini, A., Oliver, S., Rowan-Robinson, M., Serjeant, S., 2002
814: MNRAS 335, 831
815:
816: \bibitem[]{805} Holland, W.S., et al.\ 1999, MNRAS, 303, 659
817:
818: \bibitem[]{807} Huang, J-S., et al, 2004, ApJS, this volume
819:
820: \bibitem[]{809} Hughes, D.H., et al.\ 1998, Nature, 394, 241
821:
822: \bibitem[]{811} Ivison, R.J., Smail, I., Le Borgne, J.-F., Blain, A.W., Kneib, J.-P., B\'ezecourt, J., Kerr, T.H., \& Davies, J.K.\ 1998, MNRAS, 298, 583
823:
824: \bibitem[]{813} Ivison, R.J., Smail, I., Barger, A., Kneib, J.-P., Blain, A.W., Owen, F.N., Kerr, T.H., \& Cowie, L.L.\ 2000, MNRAS, 315, 209
825:
826: \bibitem[]{815} Ivison, R.J., et al.\ 2002, MNRAS, 337, 1
827:
828: \bibitem[]{817} Ivison, R.J., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
829:
830: \bibitem[]{819} Kessler, M.F., Steinz, J.A., Anderegg, M., et al., 1996,
831: A\&A, 315, L27
832:
833: %\bibitem[]{822} Knudsen, K.K., van der Werf, P.P., \& Jaffe, W.\ 2003, A\&A, 411, 343
834:
835: %\bibitem[]{824} Larson, R.B., 1998, MNRAS 301, 569
836:
837: \bibitem[]{826} Lagache, G., Haffner, L.M., Reynolds, R.J., Tufte, S.L.,
838: 2000, A\&A 354, 247
839:
840: %\bibitem[]{829} Le Floc'h, E., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
841:
842: \bibitem[]{831} Mortier, A., et al., 2004, in preparation
843:
844: %\bibitem[]{833} Neri, R., et al.\ 2003, ApJ, 597, L113
845:
846: \bibitem[]{835} Peacock, J., et al., 2000, MNRAS, 318, 535
847:
848: \bibitem[]{837} Rieke, G.H., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
849:
850: \bibitem[]{839} Rowan-Robinson, M., et al., 2004, MNRAS submitted
851: (astro-ph/0308283)
852:
853: \bibitem[]{842} Rush, B., Malkan, M.A., Spinoglio, L., 1993, ApJS, 89, 1
854:
855: \bibitem[]{844} Sato, Y., Cowie, L.L., Kawara, K., Taniguchi, Y., Sofue,
856: Y., Matsuhara, H., Okuda, H., 2002, ApJ, 578, L23
857:
858: \bibitem[]{847} Sato, Y., et al., 2003, A\&A, 405, 833
859:
860: %\bibitem[]{849} Sato, Y., et al., 2004, AJ, 127, 1285
861:
862: \bibitem[]{851} Scott, S.E., et al.\ 2002, MNRAS 331, 817
863:
864: \bibitem[]{853} Serjeant, S., et al., 2000, MNRAS 316, 768
865:
866: \bibitem[]{855} Serjeant, S., et al., 2003a, MNRAS, 344, 887
867:
868: \bibitem[]{857} Serjeant, S., et al., 2003b, MNRAS, 346, L51
869:
870: \bibitem[]{859} Simpson, C., Eisenhardt, P., 1999, PASP, 111, 691
871:
872: \bibitem[]{861} Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., \& Blain, A.W.\ 1997, ApJ, 490, L5
873:
874: %\bibitem[]{863} Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., Kneib, J.-P., Cowie, L.L., Blain, A.W., Barger, A.J., Owen, F.N., \& Morrison, G.\ 1999, MNRAS, 308, 1061
875:
876: %\bibitem[]{865} Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., Owen, F.N., Blain, A.W., \& Kneib, J.-P.\ 2000, ApJ, 528, 612
877:
878: %\bibitem[]{867} Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., Blain, A.W., \& Kneib J.-P.\ 2002, MNRAS, 331, 495
879:
880: %\bibitem[]{869} Stevens, J.A., et al.\ 2003, Nature, 425, 264
881:
882: %\bibitem[]{871} Swinbank, M., et al.\ 2004, ApJ, in preparation % NIRSPEC
883:
884: \bibitem[]{873} Webb, T.M., et al., 2003a, ApJ, 582, 6
885:
886: \bibitem[]{875} Webb, T.M., et al., 2003b, ApJ, 587, 41
887:
888: \bibitem[]{877} Werner, M., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
889:
890: %\bibitem[]{879} Wilson, G., et al., 2004, ApJS, this volume
891:
892: \end{thebibliography}
893:
894: \pagebreak[4]
895:
896: \begin{figure*}[tbh]
897: %\vspace*{-9cm}
898: \centerline{
899: %\psfig{file=plot850clipsource1.ps,width=7.5in,angle=90}
900: %\plottwo{file=fig1.ps,width=7.5in,angle=90}
901: %\epsscale{0.8}
902: %\plottwo{fig1.eps}
903: \includegraphics*[scale=0.65,angle=0]{f1.eps}
904: %\plotfiddle{fig1.eps}{7.5in}{90}{1}{1}{0}{0}
905: }
906: \caption{\small\label{fig:ids} {\it Spitzer} identification of the
907: sub-millimeter source in section \ref{sec:ids}.
908: %$\alpha=10^{\rm
909: %h}$ $51^{\rm m}$ $54.610^{\rm s}$, $\delta=+57^\circ$ $25'$
910: %$02.8''$ (J2000).
911: All postage stamps are $30''$ on a side, with North up and
912: East to the left. From left to right, the greyscale images show the
913: Subaru R-band image; $4.5\mu$m; $5.8\mu$m and
914: VLA $1.4$GHz A-array.
915: %$8\mu$m.
916: The contours, from left to right, are $850\mu$m,
917: $450\mu$m, $24\mu$m and $850\mu$m. In all cases the contours
918: are from $1\sigma$ in steps of $0.5\sigma$.
919: }
920: \end{figure*}
921:
922: \begin{figure*}[tbh]
923: \centerline{
924: %\hspace*{-1cm}
925: \includegraphics*[scale=0.35]{f2a.eps}
926: %\plottwo{fig2.eps}
927: %\plottwo{file=fig2.ps,width=2.9in}
928: %\hspace*{-2.6cm}
929: %\plottwo{file=fig3.ps,width=2.9in}
930: %\plottwo{fig3.eps}
931: \includegraphics*[scale=0.35]{f2b.eps}
932: %}
933: %\vspace*{-1.5cm}
934: %\centerline{
935: %\hspace*{-2.6cm}
936: %\plottwo{file=fig4.ps,width=2.9in}
937: %\plottwo{fig4.eps}
938: \includegraphics*[scale=0.35]{f2c.eps}
939: \hspace*{-2.6cm}
940: %\plottwo{file=fig5.ps,width=2.9in}
941: %\plottwo{fig5.eps}
942: \hspace*{2.5cm}
943: \includegraphics*[scale=0.35]{f2d.eps}
944: }
945: %\vspace*{-1.0cm}
946: \caption{\small\label{fig:histograms}
947: Histograms of the sub-millimeter signal-to-noise ratios (see text)
948: at the
949: positions of the {\it Spitzer} $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m galaxies
950: (hatched histograms, left-hand ordinates), compared to the histograms
951: for the unmasked regions of the sub-millimeter maps as a whole
952: (unhatched histograms, right-hand ordinates). Note the clear positive
953: skew in all four hatched histograms, relative to the unhatched
954: histograms. The diagrams are annotated with
955: the probabilities that identical distributions would differ by as much
956: as is observed,
957: %that the hatched and unhatched distributions are
958: %identical,
959: according to Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests (see also table
960: \ref{tab:coadd_results}).
961: }
962: \end{figure*}
963:
964: \clearpage
965:
966: \begin{table*}
967: {\scriptsize
968: \centerline{\sc Sub-millimeter stacking analysis of {\em Spitzer}
969: source catalogs}
970: %\begin{center}
971: \hspace*{-1.5cm}
972: \begin{tabular}{llllllllllll}
973: \hline\hline
974: \noalign{\smallskip}
975: Wave- &
976: $450\mu$m &
977: $450\mu$m &
978: $450\mu$m &
979: $\langle S_{450}\rangle$ &
980: $\langle S_{450}\rangle/$ &
981: $850\mu$m &
982: $850\mu$m &
983: $850\mu$m &
984: $\langle S_{850}\rangle$ &
985: $\langle S_{850}\rangle/$
986: %$\langle S_{850}\rangle/$ &
987: %$\langle S_{\rm\it Spitzer}\rangle$
988: \\
989: length &
990: $N_{\rm src}$ &
991: K-S (S:N) &
992: K-S (Flux) &
993: mJy &
994: $\langle S_{\rm\it Spitzer}\rangle$ &
995: %$\mu$Jy &
996: $N_{\rm src}$ &
997: K-S (S:N) &
998: K-S (Flux) &
999: mJy &
1000: $\langle S_{\rm\it Spitzer}\rangle$
1001: \\
1002: \noalign{\smallskip}
1003: \hline
1004: \noalign{\smallskip}
1005: % lam nsrc450 ks450sn ks450flux <s450> <s450>/<Sspit> nsrc850 ks850snr ks850sig <s850> <s850>/<Sspit>
1006: $3.6\mu$m & $452$ & $71.5\%$ & $69.3\%$ & $1.32\pm0.78$ & $38$ & $437$ & $67.3\%$ & $61.8\%$ & $0.07\pm0.10$ & $2.0$\\
1007: $4.5\mu$m & $436$ & $76.9\%$ & $70.1\%$ & $1.58\pm0.79$ & $64$ & $421$ & $76.2\%$ & $85.2\%$ & $0.09\pm0.10$ & $3.4$\\
1008: $5.8\mu$m & $154$ & $99.72\%$ & $99.80\%$ & $4.19\pm1.33$ & $95$ & $141$ & $98.66\%$ & $99.2\%$ & $0.39\pm0.17$ & $8.8$\\
1009: $8\mu$m & $111$ & $99.80\%$ & $99.76\%$ & $5.51\pm1.57$ & $98$ & $98$ & $99.16\%$ & $99.65\%$ & $0.48\pm0.20$ & $9.4$\\
1010: $24\mu$m$^a$ & $83$ & $82.5\%$ & $84.6\%$ & $2.24\pm2.08$ & $9.3$ & $78$ & $98.42\%$ & $97.65\%$ & $0.30\pm0.24$ & $1.25$\\
1011: $24\mu$m$^b$ & $42$ & $88.3\%$ & $91.51\%$ & $4.35\pm2.92$ & $12.9$& $38$ & $97.87\%$ & $97.32\%$ & $0.55\pm0.35$ & $1.68$\\
1012: %
1013: %
1014: %$3.6\mu$m & $452$ & $71.5\%$ & $69.3\%$ & $1.31\pm0.78$ & $38$ & $437$ & $67.3\%$ & $61.8\%$ & $0.07\pm0.10$ & $2.0$\\
1015: %$4.5\mu$m & $436$ & $76.9\%$ & $70.1\%$ & $1.58\pm0.79$ & $64$ & $421$ & $76.2\%$ & $85.2\%$ & $0.08\pm0.10$ & $3.4$\\
1016: %$5.8\mu$m & $154$ & $99.85\%$ & $99.88\%$ & $4.18\pm1.33$ & $95$ & $141$ & $99.22\%$ & $99.3\%$ & $0.39\pm0.17$ & $8.8$\\
1017: %$8\mu$m & $111$ & $99.80\%$ & $99.76\%$ & $5.52\pm1.57$ & $98$ & $98$ & $98.83\%$ & $99.16\%$ & $0.48\pm0.20$ & $9.4$\\
1018: %$24\mu$m$^a$ & $83$ & $82.5\%$ & $84.6\%$ & $2.25\pm2.08$ & $9.4$ & $78$ & $98.42\%$ & $97.65\%$ & $0.30\pm0.24$ & $1.27$\\
1019: %$24\mu$m$^b$ & $42$ & $88.3\%$ & $91.51\%$ & $4.35\pm2.92$ & $12.9$& $38$ & $97.87\%$ & $97.32\%$ & $0.55\pm0.35$ & $1.68$\\
1020: %
1021: %$3.6\mu$m & $457$ & $16.6\%$ & $11.8\%$ & $1.92\pm0.76$ & $198\pm165$ & $446$ & $31.9\%$ & $33.5\%$ & $0.13\pm0.10$ & $11.2\pm21.0$\\
1022: %$4.5\mu$m & $441$ & $15.8\%$ & $9.3\%$ & $2.27\pm0.77$ & $263\pm157$ & $429$ & $21.5\%$ & $14.2\%$ & $0.15\pm0.10$ & $1.7\pm22.0$\\
1023: %$5.8\mu$m & $157$ & $0.27\%$ & $2.20\%$ & $4.57\pm1.29$ & $239\pm76$ & $151$ & $0.93\%$ & $0.83\%$ & $0.48\pm0.17$ & $18.4\pm9.9$\\
1024: %$8\mu$m & $113$ & $0.02\%$ & $0.03\%$ & $6.08\pm1.53$ & $317\pm84$ & $109$ & $1.17\%$ & $0.48\%$ & $0.55\pm0.20$ & $21.6\pm10.2$\\
1025: %$24\mu$m & $352$ & $4.84\%$ & $4.92\%$ & $2.50\pm1.01$ &$26.6\pm14.9$& $344$ & $62.2\%$ & $67.3\%$ & $-0.01\pm0.11$ & $-1.57\pm1.64$\\
1026: %\\
1027: \noalign{\smallskip}
1028: \hline
1029: \end{tabular}
1030: %\end{center}
1031: \caption{
1032: %\addtolength{\baselineskip}{-1.5mm}
1033: \label{tab:coadd_results}
1034: \scriptsize
1035: Stacking analysis of the {\it Spitzer} galaxy populations in the
1036: sub-millimeter maps.
1037: The $24\mu$m $>120\mu$Jy and $>170\mu$Jy
1038: catalogs are listed separately ($^a$ and $^b$ respectively).
1039: The $N_{\rm src}$ values are the numbers of {\it
1040: Spitzer} sources used in each stacking analysis.
1041: The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test results quoted are
1042: confidence levels, i.e. a high number indicates a net statistical
1043: detection of {\it Spitzer} galaxies.
1044: Results are listed for
1045: the signal-to-noise histograms
1046: (plotted in figure \ref{fig:histograms})
1047: as well as
1048: the flux distributions.
1049: At $5.8\mu$m and $8\mu$m the
1050: galaxies are detected, marginally so at $24\mu$m,
1051: but not at $3.6\mu$m or $4.5\mu$m.
1052: Also given are mean sub-millimeter fluxes, and
1053: mean flux
1054: ratios, at the positions of the {\it Spitzer} sources.
1055: Errors quoted are $\sigma/\sqrt{N}$, where $N$ is
1056: the number of measurements and $\sigma^2$ the variance of the
1057: measurements.
1058: Known sub-millimeter sources have been excluded from this
1059: analysis, as discussed in the text.
1060: }
1061: }
1062: \end{table*}
1063:
1064:
1065:
1066: \end{document}
1067:
1068: %%
1069: %% End of file `sample.tex'.
1070: