al. 2016). Our results therefore provide evidence for the genuine growth of individual galaxies, suggesting that the growth of the population as a whole is not purely caused by a progenitor bias. We discuss the implications further in Section \[sec:discussion\].

A simple calculation allows us to compare the size differences with the observed cosmological growth. Based on population synthesis models, we estimate that the established passive population quenched approximately 0.5–1 Gyr before the PSB population at these redshifts (Wild et al. 2016), and the characteristic difference in size (e.g. based on the shift in $\Sigma_{1.5}$) is approximately 25% on average at M$_{\ast}> 10^{10.5} ~$M$_{\sun}$. The implied growth rate is similar to the observed [*cosmological*]{} growth, parameterized by van Dokkum et al. (2010) in the form $r_e
\propto (1+z)^{-1.3}$ (i.e. $\sim$25% per Gyr at $z=1.5-2$). An improvement on these tentative conclusions will require more accurate age-dating of the stellar populations, which will soon be possible with growing spectroscopic samples.

![image](uvj2.pdf){width="0.45\linewidth"} ![image](uvjbin.pdf){width="0.45\linewidth"}

Stellar mass uncertainties {#sec:uncertainties}
--------------------------

In this section we explore the potential impact of both random and systematic errors on our stellar masses.

The typical uncertainty from our Bayesian stellar mass fitting is $\sigma \simeq$ 0.1 dex for all galaxy 