Constraints on the faint end of the quasar luminosity function at z~5 in the COSMOS field
H. Ikeda, T. Nagao, K. Matsuoka, Y. Taniguchi, Y. Shioya, M. Kajisawa,, M. Enoki, P. Capak, F. Civano, A. M. Koekemoer, D. Masters, T. Morokuma, M., Salvato, E. Schinnerer, and N. Z. Scoville

TL;DR
This study investigates the abundance of low-luminosity quasars at redshift ~5 in the COSMOS field, setting upper limits on their space density and exploring implications for quasar evolution.
Contribution
It provides new constraints on the faint end of the quasar luminosity function at z~5 using deep survey data and spectroscopic follow-up, including the first upper limits at this redshift and luminosity range.
Findings
No low-luminosity type-1 quasars detected at z~5.
Upper limits on quasar space density at faint magnitudes.
Supports gradual decline of quasar density with redshift, consistent with downsizing.
Abstract
We present the result of our low-luminosity quasar survey in the redshift range of 4.5 < z < 5.5 in the COSMOS field. Using the COSMOS photometric catalog, we selected 15 quasar candidates with 22 < i' < 24 at z~5, that are ~ 3 mag fainter than the SDSS quasars in the same redshift range. We obtained optical spectra for 14 of the 15 candidates using FOCAS on the Subaru Telescope and did not identify any low-luminosity type-1 quasars at z~5 while a low-luminosity type-2 quasar at z~5.07 was discovered. In order to constrain the faint end of the quasar luminosity function at z~5, we calculated the 1sigma confidence upper limits of the space density of type-1 quasars. As a result, the 1sigma confidence upper limits on the quasar space density are Phi< 1.33*10^{-7} Mpc^{-3} mag^{-1} for -24.52 < M_{1450} < -23.52 and Phi< 2.88*10^{-7} Mpc^{-3} mag^{-1} for -23.52 < M_{1450} < -22.52. The…
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.
