Table 3.
Comparison of the activity classification between our diagnostic and the 6.2 μm PAH EW classifier (EW6.2).
| BPT-SFG (138) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EW6.2 | |||||
| SFG | AGN | Comp | Total | ||
| This work | SFG | 124 | 0 | 0 | 124 |
| NON-SFG | 14 | 0 | 0 | 14 | |
| Total | 138 | 0 | 0 | ||
| BPT-AGN (127) | |||||
| EW6.2 | |||||
| SFG | AGN | Comp | Total | ||
| This work | SFG | 14 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
| NON-SFG | 30 | 51 | 30 | 111 | |
| Total | 44 | 51 | 32 | ||
| BPT-composite (108) | |||||
| EW6.2 | |||||
| SFG | AGN | Comp | Total | ||
| This work | SFG | 31 | 1 | 1 | 33 |
| NON-SFG | 62 | 8 | 5 | 75 | |
| Total | 93 | 9 | 6 | ||
Notes. The SFG, AGN, and composite galaxies are from the S5 sample (Sect. 2.1). Here we compare our diagnostic with the classification method of Armus et al. (2007) (EW6.2), against the optical spectroscopic method (BPT), which we consider as ground truth.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.