Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-g4pgd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T12:29:25.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Radio Continuum Surveys with Square Kilometre Array Pathfinders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2013

Ray P. Norris*
Affiliation:
CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia ARC Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics (CAASTRO), Redfern, NSW 2016, Australia
J. Afonso
Affiliation:
Centro de Astronomia e Astrofísica da Universidade de Lisboa, Observatório Astronómico de Lisboa, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-018 Lisboa, Portugal
D. Bacon
Affiliation:
Institute of Cosmology and Gravitation, University of Portsmouth, Dennis Sciama Building, Burnaby Road, Portsmouth PO1 3FX, UK
Rainer Beck
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institut fur Radioastronomie, Auf dem Hugel 69, Bonn, Germany
Martin Bell
Affiliation:
ARC Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics (CAASTRO), Redfern, NSW 2016, Australia School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK Sydney Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
R. J. Beswick
Affiliation:
Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, School of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Philip Best
Affiliation:
Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK
Sanjay Bhatnagar
Affiliation:
National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 520 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA
Annalisa Bonafede
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Boltzmannstr. 2 D-85748 Garching, Germany
Gianfranco Brunetti
Affiliation:
INAF-IRA, Via P. Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna, Italy
Tamás Budavári
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
Rossella Cassano
Affiliation:
INAF-IRA, Via P. Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna, Italy
J. J. Condon
Affiliation:
National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 520 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA
Catherine Cress
Affiliation:
Physics Department, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town 7535, South Africa
Arwa Dabbech
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Lagrange, UMR 7293, Université de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, 06300, Nice, France
I. Feain
Affiliation:
CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia Sydney Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Rob Fender
Affiliation:
School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
Chiara Ferrari
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Lagrange, UMR 7293, Université de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, 06300, Nice, France
B. M. Gaensler
Affiliation:
ARC Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics (CAASTRO), Redfern, NSW 2016, Australia Sydney Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
G. Giovannini
Affiliation:
INAF-IRA, Via P. Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna, Italy
Marijke Haverkorn
Affiliation:
Leiden Observatory, Leiden University, PO Box 9513, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Department of Astrophysics/IMAPP, Radboud University Nijmegen, PO Box 9010, 6500 GL Nijmegen, The Netherlands
George Heald
Affiliation:
ASTRON, Postbus 2, 7990 AA Dwingeloo, The Netherlands
Kurt Van der Heyden
Affiliation:
Astrophysics, Cosmology & Gravity Centre, Department of Astronomy, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
A. M. Hopkins
Affiliation:
Australian Astronomical Observatory, PO Box 296, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia
M. Jarvis
Affiliation:
Physics Department, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town 7535, South Africa Centre for Astrophysics Research, Science & Technology Research Institute, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Herts, UK Oxford Astrophysics, Denys Wilkinson Building, University of Oxford, Keble Rd, Oxford OX1 3RH, UK
Melanie Johnston-Hollitt
Affiliation:
School of Chemical & Physical Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington 6140, New Zealand
Roland Kothes
Affiliation:
National Research Council of Canada, National Science Infrastructure, Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory, PO Box 248, Penticton, BC V2A 6J9, Canada
Huib Van Langevelde
Affiliation:
Leiden Observatory, Leiden University, PO Box 9513, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Joint Institute for VLBI in Europe, Postbus 2, 7990 AA DWINGELOO, The Netherlands
Joseph Lazio
Affiliation:
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109, USA
Minnie Y. Mao
Affiliation:
CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia Australian Astronomical Observatory, PO Box 296, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia National Radio Astronomy Observatory, PO Box 0, Socorro, NM 87801, USA School of Mathematics & Physics, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 37, Hobart 7001, Australia
Alejo Martínez-Sansigre
Affiliation:
Institute of Cosmology and Gravitation, University of Portsmouth, Dennis Sciama Building, Burnaby Road, Portsmouth PO1 3FX, UK
David Mary
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Lagrange, UMR 7293, Université de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, 06300, Nice, France
Kim Mcalpine
Affiliation:
Centre for Astrophysics Research, Science & Technology Research Institute, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Herts, UK Department of Physics and Electronics, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa
E. Middelberg
Affiliation:
Astronomisches Institut, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universitätsstr. 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany
Eric Murphy
Affiliation:
Carnegie Observatories, 813, Santa Barbara St., Pasadena, CA 91101, USA
P. Padovani
Affiliation:
European Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 2, D-85748 Garching bei München, Germany
Zsolt Paragi
Affiliation:
Joint Institute for VLBI in Europe, Postbus 2, 7990 AA DWINGELOO, The Netherlands
I. Prandoni
Affiliation:
INAF-IRA, Via P. Gobetti 101, 40129 Bologna, Italy
A. Raccanelli
Affiliation:
Institute of Cosmology and Gravitation, University of Portsmouth, Dennis Sciama Building, Burnaby Road, Portsmouth PO1 3FX, UK Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109, USA California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
Emma Rigby
Affiliation:
School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
I. G. Roseboom
Affiliation:
Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK
H. Röttgering
Affiliation:
Leiden Observatory, Leiden University, PO Box 9513, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
Jose Sabater
Affiliation:
Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK
Mara Salvato
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics, Boltzmannstr. 2 D-85748 Garching, Germany
Anna M. M. Scaife
Affiliation:
School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
Richard Schilizzi
Affiliation:
Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, School of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
N. Seymour
Affiliation:
CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia
Dan J. B. Smith
Affiliation:
Centre for Astrophysics Research, Science & Technology Research Institute, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Herts, UK
Grazia Umana
Affiliation:
INAF-Catania Astrophysical Observatory, Via S. Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy
G.-B. Zhao
Affiliation:
Institute of Cosmology and Gravitation, University of Portsmouth, Dennis Sciama Building, Burnaby Road, Portsmouth PO1 3FX, UK
Peter-Christian Zinn
Affiliation:
CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia Astronomisches Institut, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universitätsstr. 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany
*
36 Corresponding author. Email: Ray.Norris@csiro.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the lead-up to the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) project, several next-generation radio telescopes and upgrades are already being built around the world. These include APERTIF (The Netherlands), ASKAP (Australia), e-MERLIN (UK), VLA (USA), e-EVN (based in Europe), LOFAR (The Netherlands), MeerKAT (South Africa), and the Murchison Widefield Array. Each of these new instruments has different strengths, and coordination of surveys between them can help maximise the science from each of them. A radio continuum survey is being planned on each of them with the primary science objective of understanding the formation and evolution of galaxies over cosmic time, and the cosmological parameters and large-scale structures which drive it. In pursuit of this objective, the different teams are developing a variety of new techniques, and refining existing ones. To achieve these exciting scientific goals, many technical challenges must be addressed by the survey instruments. Given the limited resources of the global radio-astronomical community, it is essential that we pool our skills and knowledge. We do not have sufficient resources to enjoy the luxury of re-inventing wheels. We face significant challenges in calibration, imaging, source extraction and measurement, classification and cross-identification, redshift determination, stacking, and data-intensive research. As these instruments extend the observational parameters, we will face further unexpected challenges in calibration, imaging, and interpretation. If we are to realise the full scientific potential of these expensive instruments, it is essential that we devote enough resources and careful study to understanding the instrumental effects and how they will affect the data. We have established an SKA Radio Continuum Survey working group, whose prime role is to maximise science from these instruments by ensuring we share resources and expertise across the projects. Here we describe these projects, their science goals, and the technical challenges which are being addressed to maximise the science return.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of Australia 2013 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Comparison of existing and planned deep 1.4-GHz radio surveys. The horizontal axis shows the 5σ sensitivity and the vertical axis shows the sky coverage. The diagonal dashed line shows the approximate envelope of existing surveys, which is largely determined by the availability of telescope time. For example, to extend NVSS to the sensitivity of EMU would have required over 600 years of (pre-upgrade) VLA time, so in practice this would not have been possible, and this line therefore represents a hard limit to the sensitivity of traditional surveys. The squares in the top left represent the new radio surveys discussed in this paper. Surveys at other frequencies are not shown in this diagram, as their relative sensitivity depends on the assumed spectral index of the sources, although we do include SUMMS at 843 MHz, without making any correction for spectral index. A similar comparison of low-frequency surveys can be found in Tingay et al. (2012).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Flux limits (5σ) of the proposed LOFAR surveys compared with other radio surveys. The triangles represent existing surveys. The lines represent different power laws (with α = −1.6 and −0.8) to illustrate how, depending on the spectral indices of the sources, the LOFAR surveys will compare with others.

Figure 2

Figure 3. The Euclidean normalised differential radio source counts at 1.4 GHz, based on and updated from the distribution shown in Hopkins et al. (2003). The solid curve is the polynomial fit from Hopkins et al. (2003), and the dashed curve is an updated polynomial fit. The horizontal dot–dashed line represents a non-evolving population in a Euclidean universe. The shaded region shows the prediction based on fluctuations due to weak confusing sources ( a ‘P(D) analysis’) from Condon (1974) and Mitchell & Condon (1985).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Expected redshift distribution of sources with S1.4>10 μJy beam−1, based on the SKADS simulations (Wilman et al. 2008, 2010). The five lines show the distributions for SF galaxies (SFG), starburst galaxies (SB), radio-quiet quasars (RQQ), and radio-loud galaxies of Fanaroff–Riley types I and II (FRI and FR2; Fanaroff & Riley 1974). The vertical scale shows the total number of sources expected to be detected.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Differential fraction of SF galaxies as a function of 1.4-GHz flux density, taken from Norris et al. (2011b). Shaded boxes, and the two lines for Padovani et al., show the range of uncertainty in the survey results. Arrows indicate constraints from other surveys. These results show that the fraction of SF galaxies increases rapidly below 1 mJy and, at the 50 μJy survey limit of EMU/WODAN, about 75% of sources will be SF galaxies.

Figure 5

Figure 6. IRAC colour–colour plot of the FLS radio sources with q24 = log (S24μ/S1.4GHz > 0.6 (filled symbols), from Prandoni et al. (2009). Colours refer to optical spectral classification: SF galaxies (blue); narrow/broad line AGNs (green); early-type galaxies (red); galaxies with narrow emission line, which do not have a secure optical classification (magenta); sources with no optical spectroscopy available (black). Arrows indicate upper/lower limits. The lines indicate the expected IRAC colours as a function of redshift for different source types (see legend). The expected location for AGNs is highlighted in pink. For reference, we also show IRAC colours of (a) all FLS IRAC-identified radio sources (no optical identification selection applied, cyan dots); (b) the entire FLS IR-selected star/galaxy population (no radio selection applied, black dots); and (c) a sample of high-redshift obscured (type-2) quasars (Martinez-Sansigre et al. 2006), green crosses.

Figure 6

Figure 7. An illustration of the density dependence of the downsizing of galaxy SFRs, using optical images from a variety of sources. At the highest redshifts (z > 3), star formation is occurring predominantly in massive galaxies (those that become local massive ellipticals) that live in the most overdense regions (that evolve into today’s massive clusters). At lower redshifts (1 < z < 3), where EMU/WODAN will be sensitive to the most extreme SF systems, star formation is dominated by lower mass systems, in less dense environments. By the current epoch, star formation is limited primarily to low-mass galaxies in the outskirts of clusters and in the lowest-density environments.

Figure 7

Figure 8. The comoving infrared luminosity density of SF galaxies as a function of redshift, separated into four infrared luminosity ranges. The shaded regions are from Le Floc’h et al. (2005) and the bold points are derived from the analysis of faint radio sources in the 13H field (Seymour et al. 2008) where the SF radio luminosities have been converted to infrared luminosities using the relation of Bell (2003). The faint, grey points are from the compilation of Hopkins & Beacom (2006) converted to IR luminosity density. The figure shows that ULIRGs make an increasing contribution to the total star formation budget above redshifts of unity.

Figure 8

Figure 9. The fraction of radio emission of SFG due to thermal processes as a function of redshift. Galaxy magnetic fields of 10 (solid lines), 50 (dashed lines), and 100 μG (dotted lines) are shown. The radio emission from observations at 10 GHz is dominated by free–free processes beyond a redshift of z≳2 even for magnetic field strengths of ~100 μG, making it an ideal measure for the current SFR of high-z galaxies (Murphy 2009).

Figure 9

Figure 10. The expected 10 GHz (solid line) and 1.4 GHz (dotted line) flux densities for galaxies of different IR luminosities assuming an intrinsic magnetic field strength of 50 μG. The depths of possible future surveys taken by the VLA, MeerKAT (MIGHTEE), and SKA are shown. Since the non-thermal emission from SF galaxies should be suppressed by increased IC scattering of CR electrons off of the CMB, the discrepancy between the point source sensitivity requirements of surveys at 1.4 and 10 GHz falls below a factor of ~2 by z ≳ 4.

Figure 10

Figure 11. AGN luminosity function at different redshifts expected from the combination of ASKAP and MeerKAT deep surveys (based on models described by Prandoni, de Ruiter, & Parma 2007).

Figure 11

Figure 12. Redshift distribution for radio-faint USS sources in the Lockman Hole, from Afonso et al. (2011). Filled histogram denotes sources with a spectroscopic redshift determination, while the open region refers to photometric redshift estimates. A further 25 USS sources (43% of the full sample) exist but with no redshift estimate, mostly at fainter 3.6 μm fluxes and likely to be found at higher redshifts.

Figure 12

Figure 13. Predictions from the SKADS simulated skies models for the redshift distributions of radio source populations, irrespective of their radio spectral indices, for a radio survey reaching a detection sensitivity of 100 μJy at 610 MHz over 0.6 deg2, similar to the Lockman Hole radio survey considered in Afonso et al. (2011). The observed redshift distribution for USS sources in that work is also displayed.

Figure 13

Figure 14. The dependence of the redshift of the peak in space density (zpeak) on radio power for the best-fitting steep spectrum grid, showing that the numbers of the most powerful radio sources peak at the highest redshifts (Rigby et al. 2011). The shaded region and error bars give two different determinations of the spread in the measurements.

Figure 14

Figure 15. Inferred spin distributions for SMBHs at z = 0 and 1, from Martínez-Sansigre & Rawlings (2011). The vertical dashed lines mark the mean value at each redshift. Bottom: the spin distribution at z = 1 is dominated by the low-spin population, with a minor component of high-spin SMBHs. Top: at z = 0 a larger fraction of SMBHs possess a high spin, so that the mean spin is higher.

Figure 15

Figure 16. Top: mean spin of SMBHs with m ≥ 108 M, from Martínez-Sansigre & Rawlings (2011). There is a gradual increase of the mean spin between z ≳ 1 and z = 0, which is most likely due to a fraction of SMBHs undergoing major mergers and subsequent chaotic accretion. Bottom: cosmological simulation of the mean spin from Fanidakis et al. (2011), which includes chaotic accretion and mergers, and which is in excellent agreement with the inference based on radio observations (top).

Figure 16

Figure 17. Luminosity functions at 1.4 GHz of giant radio haloes in the redshift range 0.1 ≤ z ≤ 0.2. The red dashed line marks the contribution from ‘hadronic’ haloes in relaxed clusters, while the blue dashed line marks the contribution from haloes in merging ‘turbulent’) clusters. The black solid line gives the total luminosity functions (Cassano et al. 2012). The arrows show the EMU and NVSS sensitivities at that redshift.

Figure 17

Figure 18. Radio image (contours) overlaid on X-ray images (colour) of three representative clusters: (top) the radio relic in the cluster A1664 (Govoni et al. 2001), (centre) the giant radio halo in A2163 (Feretti et al. 2001), and (bottom) the double relic in A3376 (Bagchi et al. 2006).

Figure 18

Figure 19. Halo (blue) and relic (red) radio power at 1.4 GHz in units of W Hz−1 versus cluster X-ray luminosity.

Figure 19

Figure 20. Predicted correlations of the CMB with the LOFAR Tier 1 survey data. As a comparison, we also show error bars from current NVSS measurements. Note the improvement we obtain with one of the pathfinders over current constraints on all scales.

Figure 20

Figure 21. Predicted constraints on parameters using EMU+WODAN. The outer dotted ellipse shows the current constraints and the innermost grey ellipse shows the constraints available using EMU+WODAN with the three probes described. Bottom panel: dark energy parameters, showing current and predicted 68% CL constraints. Top panel: modified gravity parameter constraints.

Figure 21

Table 1. A selection of variable source statistics taken from the literature. ρ gives the snapshot rate of sources (deg−2). tchar gives the characteristic timescale on which the variability was sampled. ΔS/S gives the fractional change in flux (please refer to individual publications for further details).

Figure 22

Figure 22. Predicted peak radio flux density of unresolved UCHIIs and HCHIIs at 1.4 GHz as a function of distance from the sun. UCHIIs and HCHIIs with different diameters are displayed. We assumed a constant electron temperature of 8 000 K, a homogeneous distribution of material, and high optical depth (τ ≫ 1.0).

Figure 23

Figure 23. Typical radio spectrum of several classes of radio emitting stars. Fluxes have been derived from the radio luminosity (Seaquist, Krogulec, & Taylor 1993; Guedel 2002; Umana, Trigilio, & Catalano 1998; Trigilio et al. 2008; Berger 2006) assuming an appropriate distance for each type of radio star (10 pc for flare stars, 100 pc for active binary systems, 1 kpc for supergiants, OB and WR, 500 pc for CP stars). The bandwidth and sensitivity of EMU have also been indicated.

Figure 24

Figure 24. Feature extraction in the HST image of Abell 370 from Starck, Donoho, & Candés (2003). The top left panel shows the original HST image, top right shows the co-added image from the ridgelet and the curvelet transforms which extract extended features, bottom left shows the reconstruction from the à trous algorithm which responds to point sources, and bottom right shows the addition of the results of all three transforms.

Figure 25

Figure 25. Application of the circle Hough transform to detect radio supernova remnants in the Molonglo Galactic Plane Survey. Left to right: the original image of G315.4−2.3, the location and size of the remnant as found by the CHT, the original image with ten times the Gaussian noise and the response of the CHT in the noise case (yellow) compared with the original (black), which demonstrates the robustness of CHTs to noise (Hollitt & Johnston-Hollitt 2012).

Figure 26

Table 2. Key multiwavelength surveys with which EMU/WODAN data will be cross-identified (restricted to surveys larger than 1 000 deg2) adapted from Norris et al. (2011b). All magnitudes are in AB.

Figure 27

Figure 26. Rmag versus the 1.4-GHz radio flux density for faint radio sources. The diagonal dashed line indicates the maximum value for SFG and the approximate dividing line between radio-loud and radio-quiet AGNs, with SFGs and radio-quiet AGNs expected to populate the top left part of the diagram. The typical R magnitudes of the three classes at S1.4 = 1 μJy are also shown, with SFG split into starbursts and spirals. Finally, the mean radio and Rmag values for sources from the VLA-CDFS sample, with error bars indicating the standard deviation, are also marked. The horizontal dot–dashed lines indicate the approximate point-source limits of planned and existing surveys.