Star Formation Rate Distributions: Inadequacy of the Schechter Function
Samir Salim, Janice C. Lee

TL;DR
Galaxy luminosity functions differ fundamentally based on whether they trace stellar mass or current star formation rate, with SFR functions requiring a different mathematical form than the Schechter function used for mass functions.
Contribution
This paper demonstrates that star formation rate distributions cannot be accurately modeled by the Schechter function and proposes the Saunders function as a better fit, highlighting a key difference in galaxy luminosity functions.
Findings
SFR distributions have a shallower bright-end decline than Schechter functions.
The Saunders function provides a superior fit to SFR distributions.
UV and H alpha LFs appear Schechter-like due to dust correction effects.
Abstract
In this paper we posit that galaxy luminosity functions (LFs) come in two fundamentally different types depending on whether the luminosity traces galaxy stellar mass or its current star formation rate (SFR). Mass function types reflect the older stars and therefore the stellar mass distribution, while SFR function types arise from the young stars and hence the distribution of SFRs. Optical and near-infrared LFs are of the mass function type, and are well fit by a Schechter function (power law with an exponential cutoff at the bright end). In contrast, LFs of the SFR function type are of a different form, one that cannot be adequately described by a Schechter function. We demonstrate this difference by generating SFR distributions for mock samples of galaxies drawn from a Schechter stellar mass distribution along with established empirical relations between the SFR and stellar mass.…
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.
