The DAFT/FADA survey. I.Photometric redshifts along lines of sight to clusters in the z=[0.4,0.9] interval
L.Guennou, C.Adami, M.P.Ulmer, V.LeBrun, F.Durret, D.Johnston,, O.Ilbert, D.Clowe, R.Gavazzi, K.Murphy, T.Schrabback, S.Allam, J.Annis,, S.Basa, C.Benoist, A.Biviano, A.Cappi, J.M.Kubo, P.Marshall, A.Mazure,, F.Rostagni, D.Russeil, E.Slezak

TL;DR
This paper establishes a reference method for photometric redshift determination in high-redshift galaxy clusters, crucial for dark energy research, using multi-wavelength data and validated against previous studies.
Contribution
It introduces a robust photometric redshift estimation technique for galaxy clusters in the z=[0.4,0.9] range, tailored for dark energy and cosmological studies.
Findings
Photometric redshift accuracy of ~0.05 for 0.2<z<1.5
Environmental dependence affects photo-z accuracy in clusters
Method validated against previous works
Abstract
As a contribution to the understanding of the dark energy concept, the Dark energy American French Team (DAFT, in French FADA) has started a large project to characterize statistically high redshift galaxy clusters, infer cosmological constraints from Weak Lensing Tomography, and understand biases relevant for constraining dark energy and cluster physics in future cluster and cosmological experiments. The purpose of this paper is to establish the basis of reference for the photo-z determination used in all our subsequent papers, including weak lensing tomography studies. This project is based on a sample of 91 high redshift (z>0.4), massive clusters with existing HST imaging, for which we are presently performing complementary multi-wavelength imaging. This allows us in particular to estimate spectral types and determine accurate photometric redshifts for galaxies along the lines of…
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.
