A Census of Star-Forming Galaxies in the z~9-10 Universe based on HST+Spitzer Observations Over 19 CLASH clusters: Three Candidate z~9-10 Galaxies and Improved Constraints on the Star Formation Rate Density at z~9
R. Bouwens, L. Bradley, A. Zitrin, D. Coe, M. Franx, W. Zheng, R., Smit, O. Host, M. Postman, L. Moustakas, I. Labbe, M. Carrasco, A. Molino, M., Donahue, D. D. Kelson, M. Meneghetti, N. Benitez, D. Lemze, K. Umetsu, T., Broadhurst, J. Moustakas, P. Rosati, M. Bartelmann

TL;DR
This study identifies three candidate galaxies at redshift 9-10 using HST and Spitzer data, introduces a new method to estimate star formation rate density evolution, and finds a significant decline in UV luminosity function normalization from z~8 to z~9.
Contribution
The paper presents a novel differential approach for deriving the UV luminosity function and star formation rate density at z~9 using lensing cluster observations.
Findings
Three z~9-10 galaxy candidates identified.
UV LF normalization at z~9 is about 0.28 times that at z~8.
Results suggest a more rapid evolution of galaxy properties at z>8.
Abstract
We utilise a two-color Lyman-Break selection criterion to search for z~9-10 galaxies over the first 19 clusters in the CLASH program. A systematic search yields three z~9-10 candidates. While we have already reported the most robust of these candidates, MACS1149-JD, two additional z~9 candidates are also found and have H_{160}-band magnitudes of ~26.2-26.9. A careful assessment of various sources of contamination suggests <~1 contaminants for our z~9-10 selection. To determine the implications of these search results for the LF and SFR density at z~9, we introduce a new differential approach to deriving these quantities in lensing fields. Our procedure is to derive the evolution by comparing the number of z~9-10 galaxy candidates found in CLASH with the number of galaxies in a slightly lower redshift sample (after correcting for the differences in selection volumes), here taken to be…
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.
