tokens: In Figure 13 we also compare the number density of our red nondusty massive galaxies with the number density of passive galaxies selected in the literature for the same (or a very similar) stellar mass cut (Mancini et al. 2009 ; Muzzin et al. 2013 ; Straatman et al. 2014 ; Tomczak et al. 2014 ; Davidzon et al. 2017 ; Merlin et al. 2018 ). These passive galaxy selections are based on rest-frame colors, and their number densities are directly quoted by the authors, or we have obtained them by integrating their corresponding GSMF. 10 10 In the latter case we integrate the Schechter fits to the GSMF. The uncertainties on the number densities reflect the uncertainties on the Schechter parameters. This method was implemented by Muzzin et al. ( 2013 ), Tomczak et al. ( 2014 ), and Davidzon et al. ( 2017 ). Our comparison shows that the number density of our red nondusty galaxies is significantly higher than the number density of passive galaxies derived from Muzzin et al. ( 2013 ) and Davidzon et al. ( 2017 ) GSMFs. These differences are mainly produced by the shallower depths of the data sets used by these authors with respect to our own. In the case of the comparison with Davidzon et al. ( 2017 ), there is the effect of (a) their choice of dust extinction law and (b) their specific criterion to select passive galaxies, which is color based, but different from that applied by other authors. Davidzon et al. ( 2017 ) also correct for Eddington bias (Eddington 1913 ), which causes a drop in number densities at the massive end of the GSMF. Our red nondusty galaxy number densities are broadly consistent with the value derived by Merlin et al. ( 2018 ) and the upper limit from Mancini et al. ( 2009 ). They are also in excellent agreement with the number densities derived by Straatman et al. ( 2015 ) at z ∼ 2–3, although this might be somewhat fortuitous, given their very different methodology to select quiescent galaxies. At higher redshifts, instead, our results indicate a much faster decline in the number density of passive galaxies than that obtained by these authors. This difference does not seem to be the product of the different methodologies (note that we would select less rather than more passive galaxies using the quiescent wedge of the UVJ diagram, according to Figure 12 ). The observed differences could in part be the result of cosmic variance, as Straatman et al. ( 2014 ) analyzed images over an area ∼6.5 times smaller than that considered here. Figure 14 shows the fractions of our different populations (dusty, nondusty/blue, and nondusty/red, i.e., quiescent) among all massive () galaxies, versus redshift. We compare these fractions to those obtained in the literature. In these other works, quiescent galaxies have been selected using the UVJ color–color diagram wedge. In addition, Martis et al. ( 2016 ) have also determined regions to segregate dusty and nondusty star-forming galaxies on this color–color plane. Figure 14. Comparison of our
ner_tags: O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O O O O O O O O O B-Model I-Model O O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Model O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O B-Formula I-Formula I-Formula O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O B-Wavelength O O O O O B-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation I-Citation O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O