the [@xshooter_survey] metallicity distribution (thus using the larger of our metallicity samples as a baseline).

The degree of scaling is not of particular interest as it merely indicates the relative number of objects in the populations (out to their redshift limit) which tracks general trends in the degree of observational followup (i.e. $\sim$$\frac{1}{5}$ of LGRBs with spectroscopic redshifts have measured metallicities). Thus were a population of LGRBs to exist with exactly the same distribution as [@xshooter_survey] but with half the number of objects it would be given a scaling factor of 2 (as @xshooter_survey has an a priori scaling factor of 1).

What is of interest in this analysis are any differences in the distributional shape between the different populations. Differences in slope indicate redshift dependent biases between the populations, sharp changes within a population’s slope reveal discontinuities in that population’s rate of observation with redshift, and gradual changes show the differences in that population’s rate of observation due to the expanding number of objects out to that redshift balanced by their increasing difficulty of observation. Thus by comparing populations of galaxies with different observed properties we can thus identify redshift biases in how samples of those properties are collected 