Modeling Luminosity-dependent Galaxy Clustering through Cosmic Time

By C. Conroy, Risa Wechsler, Andrey V. Kravtsov. 2005

650 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We employ high-resolution dissipationless simulations of the concordance ΛCDM cosmology (Ω0 = 1 - ΩΛ = 0.3, h = 0.7, σ8 = 0.9) to model the observed luminosity dependence and evolution of galaxy clustering through most of the age of the universe, from z ~ 5 to z ~ 0. We use a simple, nonparametric model, which monotonically relates galaxy luminosities to the maximum circular velocity of dark matter halos (Vmax) by preserving the observed galaxy luminosity function in order to match the halos in simulations with observed galaxies. The novel feature of the model is the use of the maximum circular velocity at the time of accretion, V, for subhalos, the halos located within virial regions of larger halos. We argue that for subhalos in dissipationless simulations, V reflects the luminosity and stellar mass of the associated galaxies better than the circular velocity at the epoch of observation, V. The simulations and our model L-Vmax relation predict the shape, amplitude, and luminosity dependence of the two-point correlation function in excellent agreement with the observed galaxy clustering in the SDSS data at z ~ 0 and in the DEEP2 samples at z ~ 1 over the entire probed range of projected separations, 0.1 < rp/(h-1 Mpc) < 10.0. In particular, the small-scale upturn of the correlation function from the power-law form in the SDSS and DEEP2 luminosity-selected samples is reproduced very well. At z ~ 3-5, our predictions also match the observed shape and amplitude of the angular two-point correlation function of Lyman break galaxies (LBGs) on both large and small scales, including the small-scale upturn. This suggests that, like galaxies in lower redshift samples, the LBGs are fair tracers of the overall halo population and that their luminosity is tightly correlated with the circular velocity (and hence mass) of their dark matter halos.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/45eaf44be3517f1a95b75d086761838a28d323ff

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

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Citations in the corpus

ON THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN STAR FORMATION AND FEEDBACK IN GALAXY FORMATION SIMULATIONS (2014, background): “1 Department of Physics, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, United Kingdom o.agertz@surrey.ac.uk 2 Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637 USA 3 Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637 USA 4 Enrico Fer”
EVOLUTION OF THE GALAXY–DARK MATTER CONNECTION AND THE ASSEMBLY OF GALAXIES IN DARK MATTER HALOS (2011, methodology): “Although subhalo abundance matching yields galaxy correlation functions that are in remarkably good agreement with observations (e.g., Conroy et al. 2006; Guo et al. 2010; Wang & Jing 2010), it implies a particular path for the evolution of satellite galaxies.”
Simultaneous constraints on the growth of structure and cosmic expansion from the multipole power spectra of the SDSS DR7 LRG sample (2013, methodology): “While most of studies with subhaloes are explored in the context of subhalo abundance matching, called as the SHAM (e.g. Conroy et al. (2006); Masaki et al. (2012)), our subhalo catalogue is based on a simple mass cut so that it reproduces the measured anisotropic signal and hence complementary to…”
HALO OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION MODELING OF CLUSTERING OF LUMINOUS RED GALAXIES (2008, neutral): “This appears to differ from observational inferences and theoretical predictions for low-luminosity samples (e.g., Zehavi et al. 2005b; Zheng et al. 2007; Kravtsov et al. 2004; Zheng et al. 2005; Conroy et al. 2006).”
There's no place like home? Statistics of Milky Way-mass dark matter haloes (2009, background): “This “abundance matching” assumption (Vale & Ostriker 2004) can reproduce observed galaxy clustering and its evolution with redshift (Conroy et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2008; Conroy & Wechsler 2009; Wetzel & White 2010; Guo et al. 2010).”
REPRODUCING THE STELLAR MASS/HALO MASS RELATION IN SIMULATED ΛCDM GALAXIES: THEORY VERSUS OBSERVATIONAL ESTIMATES (2012, methodology): “Recently, Moster et al. (2012, hereafter M12) and other groups (Vale & Ostriker 2004; Conroy et al. 2006; Mandelbaum et al. 2006; More et al. 2009; Guo et al. 2010; Trujillo-Gomez et al. 2011; Behroozi et al. 2012) used the Abundance Matching Technique (AMT) and its variations (Yang et al. 2012) to…”
The Phoenix Project: the dark side of rich galaxy clusters (2012, positive): “…by tidal stripping and so are poor indicators of galaxy properties, the mass or circular velocity at infall are plausibly much better and give meaningful results when used in subhalo abundance matching analyses (Vale & Ostriker 2004; Conroy et al. 2006; Behroozi et al. 2010; Guo et al. 2010).”
Observational probes of cosmic acceleration (2012, background): “For a galaxy sample defined by a threshold Lmin in optical or near-IR luminosity (or stellar mass), theoretical models and empirical studies (too numerous to list comprehensively, but our summary here is especially influenced by Kravtsov et al. 2004; Conroy et al. 2006; Zehavi et al. 2011) suggest t”
The dark side of galaxy colour (2013, methodology): “The second technique is known as abundance matching (Kravtsov et al. 2004; Vale & Ostriker 2004; Tasitsiomi et al. 2004; Vale & Ostriker 2006; Conroy et al. 2006; Conroy & Wechsler 2009; Guo et al. 2010; Simha et al. 2010; Neistein et al. 2010; Watson et al. 2012; Reddick et al. 2012;…”
Virial Scaling of Massive Dark Matter Halos: Why Clusters Prefer a High Normalization Cosmology (2007, background): “Faltenbacher & Diemand (2006) showed that an alternative approach of mapping galaxy luminosity to subhalo size at the time of accretion (Nagai & Kravtsov 2005; Conroy et al. 2006) yields a similarly weak velocity bias, bv ¼ 1:02, within rvar.”
The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: mock galaxy catalogues for the BOSS Final Data Release (2015, background): “It also reproduces the scale dependence of galaxy clustering over a large range of epochs (Conroy et al. 2006; Guo et al. 2010).”
CANDELS: THE COSMIC ASSEMBLY NEAR-INFRARED DEEP EXTRAGALACTIC LEGACY SURVEY—THE HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE OBSERVATIONS, IMAGING DATA PRODUCTS, AND MOSAICS (2011, background): “…generations of stars (Cooray et al. 2004, Fernandez et al. 2010), as well as enabling the use of clustering statistics to constrain the properties of dark matter halos (Conroy et al. 2006, Lee et al. 2006, 2009), which drives the need to produce contiguous mosaics across each of the CANDELS fields.”
METALLICITY-DEPENDENT QUENCHING OF STAR FORMATION AT HIGH REDSHIFT IN SMALL GALAXIES (2011, methodology): “While we can crudely connect the halos to observed objects via statistical inference (e.g. Conroy et al. 2006; Conroy & Wechsler 2009), we still lack a first-principles model for determining the observable stellar content of a given dark-matter halo.”