simba: Cosmological simulations with black hole growth and feedback

By R. Dav'e, Daniel Anglés-Alcázar, D. Narayanan, Qi Li, M. Rafieferantsoa, S. Appleby. Monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 2019

578 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We introduce the Simba simulations, the next generation of the Mufasa cosmological galaxy formation simulations run with Gizmo's meshless finite mass hydrodynamics. Simba includes updates to Mufasa's sub-resolution star formation and feedback prescriptions, and introduces black hole growth via the torque-limited accretion model of Angles-Alcazar et al. (2017) from cold gas and Bondi accretion from hot gas, along with black hole feedback via kinetic bipolar outflows and X-ray energy. Ejection velocities are taken to be ~10^3 km/s at high Eddington ratios, increasing to ~8000 km/s at Eddington ratios below 2%, with a constant momentum input of 20L/c. Simba further includes an on-the-fly dust production, growth, and destruction model. Our Simba run with (100 Mpc/h)^3 and 1024^3 gas elements reproduces numerous observables, including galaxy stellar mass functions at z=0-6, the stellar mass--star formation rate main sequence, HI and H2 fractions, the mass-metallicity relation at z=0 and z=2, star-forming galaxy sizes, hot gas fractions in massive halos, and z=0 galaxy dust properties. However, Simba also yields an insufficiently sharp truncation of the z=0 mass function, and too-large sizes for low-mass quenched galaxies. We show that Simba's jet feedback is primarily responsible for quenching massive galaxies.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/49513aa396beab3a292a3587e7cd2289e633bfa2

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

The ALPINE-ALMA [CII] survey (2020, methodology): “The contribution of dark matter to the total velocity component at 1–2 Re, where Re is the effective radius of the galaxy, is expected to be low (Barnabè et al. 2012), but can be estimated by matching our sample to the output of state-of-the-art hydro-dynamical simulations such as EAGLE (McAlpine et”
On the stunning abundance of super-early, luminous galaxies revealed by JWST (2022, background): “…from numerical simulations (e.g. Vogelsberger et al. 2014; Schaye et al. 2015; Rosdahl et al. 2018; Pillepich et al. 2018; Hopkins et al. 2018; Davé et al. 2019; Trebitsch et al. 2021; Pallottini et al. 2022) to semi-analytic models (e.g. Dayal et al. 2014; Somerville & Davé 2015; Lacey et…”
The Complete CEERS Early Universe Galaxy Sample: A Surprisingly Slow Evolution of the Space Density of Bright Galaxies at z ∼ 8.5–14.5 (2023, methodology): “…as in F23, including semianalytic models ( SAMs; Dayal et al. 2017; Yung et al. 2019, 2020 ) , empirical models ( Behroozi & Silk 2015; Mason et al. 2015; Behroozi et al. 2019 ) , and cosmological hydrodynamic simulations ( Davé et al. 2019; Wilkins et al. 2023; Kannan et al. 2022, 2023 ) .”
A Census of Photometrically Selected Little Red Dots at 4 < z < 9 in JWST Blank Fields (2024, background): “…function is in tension with current theoretical frameworks (Behroozi & Silk 2015; Dayal et al. 2017; Yung et al. 2019, 2020; Behroozi et al. 2019, 2020; Dav´e et al. 2019; Wilkins et al. 2022; Kannan et al. 2023; Mason et al. 2023; Mauerhofer & Dayal 2023), which suggests exotic initial mass…”
Cool outflows in galaxies and their implications (2020, background): “…the observable properties of the best-studied outflow systems (Vogelsberger et al. 2014; Schaye et al. 2015; Dubois et al. 2016; Choi et al. 2018; Biernacki and Teyssier 2018; Brennan et al. 2018; Hopkins et al. 2018b; Davé et al. 2019; Nelson et al. 2019; Peeples et al. 2019; Hafen et al. 2019).”
CEERS Key Paper. I. An Early Look into the First 500 Myr of Galaxy Formation with JWST (2022, background): “In the bottom panel of Figure 14, we also compare to nine recent model-based predictions, including from the Santa Cruz (Yung et al. 2019a, 2020) and DELPHI (Dayal et al. 2017) SAMs, empirical models by Behroozi & Silk (2015), Mason et al. (2015), and the UNIVERSEMACHINE (Behroozi et al. 2019, 2020)”