meeting 2026 02 09 gw - JacobPilawa/TriaxSchwarzschild_wiki_6 GitHub Wiki
K-Correction Investigations
W1 and W2 Sanity Plots
I first did some investigation into the K-band k-corrections and have some additional diagnostics/sanity checks for the W1 and W2 k-corrections below. First, here are some diagnostics plots for the W1 and W1-W2 colors:
As we can see in these plots, the K-correction on W1 has a much larger effect (~0.2 magnitude at the median) compared to the color K-correction, which is nearer ~0.05 magnitudes, going in the opposite direction from the W1 k-correction.
W1 K-Correction
W1-W2 K-Correction
I then started to look at the effect that the k-correction had on the various W1/W2 mass prescriptions we had. In these plots, each panel represent a different mass prescription; the x-axes are without applying any k-corrections (that is to say, using the observed W1-W2 colors and the observed W1 magntiude converted to absolute magntiude).
Plot
one-to-one
residuals
K-band K-corrections
I found a few literature results that try to quanitfy the k-correction versus redshift, summarized in this plot:
Throughout the work below, I've taken the blue curve to be the "true" k-correction as a nice balance between the other two results. Qualitatively, the results are not too dissimilar from the W1/W2 k-corrections we have seen before.
K Band K-Correction
Similar to the above, I then applied the K-correciton to the K-band magnitudes, and looked at the impact on the resulting stellar mass estimates:
Plot
Impact on k-band mag.
Impact on mass
We can then look at the subset of galaxies that have both K band and W based stellar mass estimates for the four cases:
The most interesting thing to my eye is the level of agreement between the non-k-corrected Jarrett+23 simple approach vs. the LM24 non-k-corrected approach. The binned residuals have almost no dependence on redshift (they have basically a fixed offset with some scatter):
Case
Plot
Everything K-Corrected
Nothing K-Corrected
WISE K-Corrected
K-band K-Corrected
Cross Matching with MASSIVE
I've also started to do some matching with the full set of MASSIVE galaxies rather than the MM13 sample alone.
I seem to be able to confidently match ~95 out of the ~115 galaxies or so. I need to investigate why the others have dropped from my catalog, I just haven't gotten the chance to just yet.
Here's a quick visualization of the matching procedure: I found all galaxies within 0.1 degree of the MASSIVE galaxy coordinates, and I used a 3 arcsec matching radius.
The furthest match is at the ~1.5 arcsec level; the first "mismatch" galaxy appears to accurately not have a match (that is to say, I don't see a potential match in the plot to my eye that got missed due to a 3 arcsec matching radius). So at least I think I've found all I can find at this level:
MASSIVE Matching Diagnostics
K-Band from MASSIVE vs. My Catalog
Matched Galaxies (within 3 arcsec): 95 galaxies
List of Matched Galaxies and some data
Name
Dist_MASSIVE(Mpc)
K_MASSIVE
KCORR
zPhoto_Corr
Sep(arcsec)
NGC 0057
76.30
8.68
8.68
0.015
0.209
NGC 0080
81.90
8.92
8.92
0.014
0.294
NGC 0128
59.30
8.52
8.52
0.013
0.184
NGC 0227
75.90
9.09
9.09
0.013
0.367
NGC 0315
70.30
7.96
7.96
0.008
0.330
NGC 0383
71.30
8.48
8.48
0.015
0.309
NGC 0393
85.70
9.23
9.23
0.017
0.211
NGC 0467
75.80
9.01
9.01
0.013
0.354
PGC 004829
99.00
9.74
9.73
0.018
0.253
NGC 0499
69.80
8.74
8.73
0.012
0.194
NGC 0507
69.80
8.30
8.30
0.011
0.310
NGC 0533
77.90
8.42
8.44
0.012
1.336
NGC 0665
74.60
8.88
8.88
0.014
0.379
UGC 01332
99.20
9.48
9.48
0.019
0.200
NGC 0708
69.00
8.57
8.57
0.017
0.068
UGC 01389
99.20
9.63
9.63
0.017
0.426
NGC 0890
55.60
8.25
8.24
0.013
0.036
NGC 0910
79.80
9.20
9.20
0.016
0.139
NGC 0997
90.40
9.42
9.42
0.017
0.113
NGC 1016
95.20
8.58
8.58
0.013
0.388
NGC 1060
67.40
8.20
8.20
0.010
0.047
NGC 1066
67.40
8.89
8.89
0.016
0.112
NGC 1132
97.60
9.26
9.26
0.013
0.371
NGC 1167
70.20
8.64
8.64
0.011
0.182
NGC 1226
85.70
9.21
9.21
0.015
0.108
IC 0310
77.50
9.15
9.14
0.017
0.218
NGC 1272
77.50
8.69
8.69
0.015
0.140
UGC 02783
85.80
9.27
9.27
0.016
0.212
NGC 1453
56.40
8.12
8.12
0.010
0.161
NGC 1497
87.80
9.48
9.47
0.011
0.196
NGC 1600
63.80
8.04
8.04
0.011
0.072
NGC 1573
65.00
8.56
8.55
0.012
0.041
NGC 1684
63.50
8.69
8.69
0.010
0.210
NGC 1700
54.40
8.09
8.09
0.011
0.382
NGC 2208
84.10
9.04
9.04
0.014
0.401
NGC 2274
73.80
8.68
8.68
0.015
0.216
NGC 2258
59.00
8.23
8.23
0.010
0.155
NGC 2320
89.40
8.85
8.85
0.016
0.000
UGC 03683
85.10
9.16
9.15
0.017
0.289
NGC 2332
89.40
9.40
9.39
0.019
0.288
NGC 2340
89.40
8.88
8.88
0.017
0.059
UGC 03894
97.20
9.37
9.37
0.021
0.244
NGC 2418
74.10
8.95
8.95
0.014
0.319
NGC 2456
107.30
9.83
9.83
0.025
0.110
NGC 2492
97.80
9.60
9.60
0.022
0.096
NGC 2513
70.80
8.74
8.74
0.012
0.216
NGC 2693
74.40
8.60
8.60
0.014
0.170
NGC 2892
101.10
9.35
9.35
0.018
0.123
NGC 2918
102.30
9.57
9.57
0.019
0.217
NGC 3158
103.40
8.80
8.80
0.016
0.311
NGC 3209
94.60
9.34
9.34
0.016
0.338
NGC 3332
89.10
9.37
9.37
0.019
0.336
NGC 3343
93.80
9.57
9.57
0.016
0.400
NGC 3462
99.20
9.37
9.37
0.015
0.203
NGC 3562
101.00
9.38
9.38
0.014
0.056
NGC 3615
101.20
9.45
9.45
0.018
0.211
NGC 3805
99.40
9.30
9.30
0.016
0.113
NGC 3816
99.40
9.60
9.60
0.015
0.192
NGC 3842
99.40
9.08
9.08
0.015
0.184
NGC 3862
99.40
9.49
9.49
0.016
0.296
NGC 3937
101.20
9.42
9.42
0.017
0.259
NGC 4059
107.20
9.75
9.75
0.020
0.207
NGC 4073
91.50
8.49
8.49
0.013
0.183
NGC 4213
101.60
9.61
9.61
0.021
0.585
NGC 4472
16.70
5.40
5.40
0.000
0.051
NGC 4486
16.70
5.81
5.81
0.005
0.105
NGC 4555
103.60
9.17
9.17
0.017
0.032
NGC 4816
102.00
9.71
9.71
0.019
0.270
NGC 4839
102.00
9.20
9.20
0.016
0.120
NGC 4889
102.00
8.41
8.41
0.016
0.204
NGC 4914
74.50
8.65
8.65
0.011
0.388
NGC 5129
107.50
9.25
9.25
0.016
0.240
PGC 047776
103.80
9.73
9.73
0.019
0.228
NGC 5252
103.80
9.77
9.77
0.016
0.332
NGC 5322
34.20
7.16
7.16
0.010
0.080
NGC 5490
78.60
8.92
8.92
0.014
0.398
NGC 5557
51.00
8.08
8.08
0.009
0.329
IC 1143
97.30
9.51
9.51
0.019
0.418
UGC 10097
91.50
9.38
9.38
0.015
0.390
NGC 6223
86.70
9.11
9.11
0.013
0.340
NGC 6375
95.80
9.42
9.41
0.021
0.415
UGC 10918
100.20
9.31
9.31
0.018
0.141
NGC 6442
98.00
9.59
9.59
0.019
0.229
NGC 6575
106.00
9.56
9.56
0.020
0.234
NGC 7052
69.30
8.58
8.57
0.011
0.180
NGC 7242
84.40
8.33
8.33
0.016
0.144
NGC 7265
82.80
8.69
8.69
0.014
0.200
NGC 7274
82.80
9.24
9.24
0.016
0.278
NGC 7386
99.10
9.42
9.42
0.017
0.193
NGC 7550
72.70
8.91
8.91
0.013
0.293
NGC 7556
103.00
9.25
9.25
0.016
0.144
NGC 7618
76.30
9.04
9.04
0.013
0.357
NGC 7619
54.00
8.03
8.03
0.009
0.101
NGC 7626
54.00
8.03
8.03
0.011
0.216
NGC 7681
96.80
9.22
9.22
0.015
0.585
Unmatched GALAXIES (no match within 3 arcsec): 20 galaxies
Umatched galaxies
Name
Distance(Mpc)
K_apparent
M_K
Nearest_Sep(arcsec)
N_Sources_0.1deg
NGC 0410
71.30
8.38
-25.90
114.471
20
NGC 0547
74.00
8.49
-25.83
107.025
26
NGC 0741
73.90
8.30
-26.06
117.969
19
NGC 0777
72.20
8.37
-25.94
121.589
20
NGC 1129
73.90
8.24
-26.14
116.379
30
NGC 2256
79.40
8.67
-25.87
103.931
31
NGC 2672
61.50
8.35
-25.60
103.724
18
NGC 2783
101.40
9.32
-25.72
117.888
25
NGC 2832
105.20
8.70
-26.42
108.024
14
NGC 4055
107.20
9.76
-25.40
89.915
24
NGC 4065
107.20
9.69
-25.47
118.720
29
NGC 4066
107.20
9.81
-25.35
79.705
23
NGC 4649
16.50
5.74
-25.36
151.992
13
NGC 4874
102.00
8.86
-26.18
141.498
42
NGC 5208
105.00
9.51
-25.61
66.429
15
NGC 5353
41.10
7.63
-25.45
131.788
10
NGC 6364
105.30
9.74
-25.38
67.008
48
NGC 6482
61.40
8.37
-25.60
79.043
21
NGC 7426
80.00
8.82
-25.74
73.376
8
NGC 7436
106.60
9.01
-26.16
89.808
21
One interesting thing about the MASSIVE vs. zPhoto_Corr distances -- it seems like the distances in the MASSIVE Survey paper are generally larger than the distance inferred from the redshifts:
Distance Comparison
I then looked at a few mass comparisons for these galaxies
In the first plot, I essentially compute the stellar mass from the MASSIVE Paper I data alone (in the table and then the equations). I compare this against the W1/W2 based stellar mass estimates. A key details is that I am using different distances in the two calculations; for the K-band masses, I am using the distance from the MASSIVE table. For the W-based masses, I am using the zPhoto_Corr convereted to D_L.
To check to see the effect of the distance, I have a second version of the plot where I use the distances from the MASSIVE paper consistently throughout.
And as one last mass comparison, I've computed the stellar masses from the LM24 and Cappellari relation using only the data from my catalog (so the distances throughout use zPhoto, etc).
Case
Plot
Wise vs. Kband (zPhoto throughout)
Wise vs. Kband (D_L throughout)
Wise vs. Kband (D_L and zPhoto mixed)
Here are some notes and extended tables related to the matching. I asked AI to throw this together just before the meeting so I still need to spot check things, but it looks broadly consistent with my work.
Paper I Mass Calculation
Stellar masses calculated using equations from MASSIVE Paper I (Ma et al. 2014):
For one last test, I tried to full compute the stellar masses for MASSIVE galaxies using the data in Table 3 of MASSIVE I versus the data in my catalog. Looking into the very minor differences I am seeing (I think it comes from rounding some of the K band mags and the extinctions, but it's basically a perfect recovey):