The mass function of dark matter haloes

By Adrian Jenkins, Carlos S. Frenk, Simon D. M. White, J. Colberg, Shaun Cole, August E. Evrard, Hugh M. P. Couchman, Naoki Yoshida. 2000

1,384 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We combine data from a number of N-body simulations to predict the abundance of dark haloes in cold dark matter (CDM) universes over more than four orders of magnitude in mass. A comparison of different simulations suggests that the dominant uncertainty in our results is systematic and is smaller than 10–30 per cent at all masses, depending on the halo definition used. In particular, our 'Hubble volume' simulations of τCDM and ΛCDM cosmologies allow the abundance of massive clusters to be predicted with uncertainties well below those expected in all currently planned observational surveys. We show that for a range of CDM cosmologies and for a suitable halo definition, the simulated mass function is almost independent of epoch, of cosmological parameters and of the initial power spectrum when expressed in appropriate variables. This universality is of exactly the kind predicted by the familiar Press–Schechter model, although this model predicts a mass function shape that differs from our numerical results, overestimating the abundance of 'typical' haloes and underestimating that of massive systems.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/020ef3f13742e020697ca6ab78cee9ac14b32d01

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: matter and galaxy clustering (2017, background): “However, the latter still shows some discrepancies compared to N-body simulations, which can be addressed through empirical fitting functions to the numerical results (e.g. Jenkins et al. 2001).”
A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF UNCERTAINTIES AFFECTING THE STELLAR MASS–HALO MASS RELATION FOR 0 < z < 4 (2010, background): “…in the Halo Mass Function Dark matter halo properties over the mass range 1010−1015 M⊙ have been extensively analyzed in simulations (e.g., Jenkins et al. 2001; Warren et al. 2006; Tinker et al. 2008), and the overall cosmology has been constrained by probes such as WMAP (Spergel et al.…”
The Physics of Galaxy Clustering. I. A Model for Subhalo Populations (2004, methodology): “8, with the known mass function of host halos (Jenkins et al. 2001), we can compute the number density of all halos, including both host halos and their subhalos, as a function of Vmax threshold.”
Resolving cosmic structure formation with the Millennium-II simulation (2009, background): “…f(σ), which is related to the comoving number density of halos via f(σ) = M ρ̄(z) dn(M, z) d log σ−1 , (8) takes on a universal form (for perspectives on universality of the halo mass function, see Jenkins et al. 2001; Reed et al. 8 δc = 1.68647 at all redshifts for an Einstein-de Sitter universe.”
COSMOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS FROM THE SLOAN DIGITAL SKY SURVEY MaxBCG CLUSTER CATALOG (2009, methodology): “…simulations, and a careful calibration of the abundance of halos as a function of mass for various cosmologies has been performed (see e.g. Jenkins et al. 2001; Warren 1 Center for Cosmology and Astro-Particle Physics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210…”
Foreground simulations for the LOFAR-epoch of reionization experiment (2008, neutral): “This catalogue provides a list of clusters up to redshift z ≤ 4.37 with angular coverage of 100 deg2 (Colberg et al. 2000; Jenkins et al. 2001; Evrard et al. 2002).”
The universality of the virial halo mass function and models for non-universality of other halo definitions (2015, methodology): “…parameters from observational datasets, so it has served as the basis for fitting functions whose parameters are calibrated using numerical simulations of the dark matter (Sheth & Tormen 1999; Jenkins et al. 2001; Warren et al. 2006; Sheth & Tormen 2002; Del Popolo & Gambera 1998, 1999).”
SIMULATIONS OF THE MICROWAVE SKY (2009, methodology): “The halo abundance above a minimum mass per unit redshift per square degree measured from the large-scale structure simulation (points) is compared with the semi-analytic fitting formula (lines) from Jenkins et al. (2001).”
Feedback and recycled wind accretion: assembling the z= 0 galaxy mass function (2009, background): “In the mass range corresponding to halos of individual galaxies, the dark matter halo mass function, Φ(Mh), follows roughly dn/dMh ∼ M −2 h (e.g Sheth & Tormen 1999; Jenkins et al. 2001; Springel et al. 2005), turning over only in the group mass range.”
Stable clustering, the halo model and non-linear cosmological power spectra (2002, methodology): “As studies over many years have shown with increasing accuracy (Press & Schechter 1974; Sheth & Tormen 1999; Jenkins et al. 2001), the halo mass function appears to depend only on the dimensionless fluctuation amplitude ν ≡ δc/σ(R, t), (52) where δc is a constant of order unity, usually identified…”
Efficient Simulations of Early Structure Formation and Reionization (2007, methodology): “(10) is in fair agreement with simulations, especially for halos near the characteristic mass, at low redshifts it underestimates the number of high–mass halos and overestimates the number of low–mass halos when compared with large numerical simulations (e.g. Jenkins et al. 2001).”
Hydrodynamical simulations of cluster formation with central AGN heating (2005, methodology): “These clusters have been extracted from a cosmological CDM simulation of box size 479 h−1 Mpc (Yoshida, Sheth & Diaferio 2001; Jenkins et al. 2001), and again have been re-simulated with the ZIC technique at higher resolution (Dolag 2004).”
Percolation Galaxy Groups and Clusters in the SDSS Redshift Survey: Identification, Catalogs, and the Multiplicity Function (2006, background): “%) for a wide range of epochs and cosmological models (Jenkins et al. 2001).”
Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations in Simulated Galaxy Redshift Surveys (2005, background): “The minimum group multiplicity, m, of 4 and 10 are small compared to 20 − 30 particles usually desired for robust halo identification (Somerville et al. 2000; Jenkins et al. 2001).”
The EAGLE simulations of galaxy formation: calibration of subgrid physics and model variations (2015, background): “Since the dark matter halo mass function is particularly steep (e.g. Jenkins et al. 2001), even a small change to the relation between stellar mass and halo mass impacts significantly upon the number density of galaxies at a fixed stellar mass.”
21cmfast: a fast, seminumerical simulation of the high‐redshift 21‐cm signal (2010, methodology): “…extrapolate from z: δ̄R ′′ nl (x, z ′′) = δ̄R′′nl (x, z)D(z′′)/D(z); δc is the critical linear density corresponding to virialization; and f̄ST(z′′, Smin) is the mean ST collapsed fraction (with the Jenkins et al. 2001 normalization) while f̄PS,nl(z′′, Smin, R′′) is the mean PS collapse fraction,…”
The X-Ray Luminosity-Mass Relation for Local Clusters of Galaxies (2006, methodology): “We use parameters derived for the mass scale M200 by Evrard et al. (2002), based on the Jenkins mass function (hereafter JMF, Jenkins et al. (2001)) form determined from a suite of cosmological simulations.”