Mid-Infrared Galaxy Morphology from the Spitzer Survey of Stellar Structure in Galaxies (S^4G): The Imprint of the de Vaucouleurs Revised Hubble-Sandage Classification System at 3.6 microns
R. Buta, K. Sheth, M. Regan, J. Hinz, A. Gil de Paz, K., Menendez-Delmestre, J. Munoz-Mateos, M. Seibert, E. Laurikainen, H. Salo, D., Gadotti, E. Athanassoula, A. Bosma, J. Knapen, L. Ho, B. Madore, D., Elmegreen, K. Masters, S. Comeron, M. Aravena

TL;DR
This study demonstrates that mid-infrared galaxy morphology at 3.6 microns closely aligns with traditional blue-light classifications, with notable differences mainly in dusty galaxies and a tendency for earlier types due to bulge prominence.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive analysis of galaxy morphology in the mid-IR using Spitzer data, confirming the correlation with blue-light classifications and highlighting specific differences.
Findings
Mid-IR classifications correlate well with blue-light types.
Dusty galaxies show significant morphological differences.
Galaxies appear slightly earlier in type at 3.6 microns.
Abstract
Spitzer Space Telescope Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) imaging provides an opportunity to study all known morphological types of galaxies in the mid-IR at a depth significantly better than ground-based near-infrared and optical images. The goal of this study is to examine the imprint of the de Vaucouleurs classification volume in the 3.6 micron band, which is the best Spitzer waveband for galactic stellar mass morphology owing to its depth and its reddening-free sensitivity mainly to older stars. For this purpose, we have prepared classification images for 207 galaxies from the Spitzer archive, most of which are formally part of the Spitzer Survey of Stellar Structure in Galaxies (S^4G), a Spitzer post-cryogenic ("warm") mission Exploration Science Legacy Program survey of 2,331 galaxies closer than 40 Mpc. For the purposes of morphology, the galaxies are interpreted as if the images are…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
