HALO OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION MODELING OF CLUSTERING OF LUMINOUS RED GALAXIES

By Zheng Zheng, Idit Zehavi, Daniel J. Eisenstein, D. Weinberg, Y. P. J. I. F. A. Study, Case Western Reserve University, U. Arizona, T. O. S. University, S. Observatory. 2008

180 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We perform halo occupation distribution (HOD) modeling to interpret small-scale and intermediate-scale clustering of 35,000 luminous early-type galaxies and their cross-correlation with a reference imaging sample of normal L* galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. The modeling results show that most of these luminous red galaxies (LRGs) are central galaxies residing in massive halos of typical mass M∼ a few times 1013–1014 h−1 M☉, while a few percent of them have to be satellites within halos in order to produce the strong auto-correlations exhibited on smaller scales. The mean luminosity Lc of central LRGs increases with the host halo mass, with a rough scaling relation of Lc ∝ M0.5. The halo mass required to host on average one satellite LRG above a luminosity threshold is found to be about 10 times higher than that required to host a central LRG above the same threshold. We find that in massive halos the distribution of L* galaxies roughly follows that of the dark matter and their mean occupation number scales with halo mass as M1.5. The HOD modeling results also allow for an intuitive understanding of the scale-dependent luminosity dependence of the cross-correlation between LRGs and L* galaxies. Constraints on the LRG HOD provide tests for models of formation and evolution of massive galaxies, and they are also useful for cosmological parameter investigations. In one of the appendices, we provide LRG HOD parameters with dependence on cosmology inferred from modeling the two-point auto-correlation functions of LRGs.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/59668ea6749c6a67712eeafa0963649192a202f4

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 Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

Cosmological constraints from the clustering of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey DR7 luminous red galaxies (vol 404, pg 60, 2010) (2009, methodology): “Several authors have studied this relation using the small- and intermediate-scale clustering in the SDSS LRG sample (Zehavi et al. 2005a; Masjedi et al. 2006; Kulkarni et al. 2007; Wake et al. 2008; Zheng et al. 2009; Reid & Spergel 2009) and galaxy–galaxy lensing (Mandelbaum et al. 2006).”
Galaxy clustering in the CFHTLS-Wide: the changing relationship between galaxies and haloes since z ~ 1.2 (2011, background): “For Mmin ∼ 1012 h−1 M , the ratio M1/Mmin is ∼12 (as compared to ∼10 for luminous red galaxies found by Zheng et al. 2009) and shows a much smaller redshift evolution over the entire mass range.”
Cosmological Constraints from a Combination of Galaxy Clustering and Lensing -- III. Application to SDSS Data (2012, methodology): “As discussed in Paper I, this is the standard method used by numerous authors in the past (e.g., Zehavi et al. 2004, 2005, 2011; Abazajian et al. 2005; Tinker et al. 2005; Zheng et al. 2007, 2009; Yoo et al. 2009).”
The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: mock galaxy catalogues for the BOSS Final Data Release (2015, methodology): “…methods connecting haloes to galaxies like the HOD model, which we are not going to consider here (e.g. Berlind & Weinberg 2002; Kravtsov et al. 2004; Zehavi et al. 2005; Zentner et al. 2005; Zheng, Coil & Zehavi 2007; Ross & Brunner 2009; Skibba & Sheth 2009; Zheng et al. 2009; White et al. 2011).”
Galaxy assembly bias: a significant source of systematic error in the galaxy–halo relationship (2013, methodology): “…assem- c© 0000 RAS, MNRAS 000, 000–000 bly bias effects (e.g. Zehavi et al. 2005; Yang et al. 2005; Zheng et al. 2007; van den Bosch et al. 2007; Zheng et al. 2009; Simon et al. 2009; Abbas et al. 2010; Watson et al. 2010; Matsuoka et al. 2011; Miyaji et al. 2011; Leauthaud et al. 2011,…”
Cosmological constraints from a combination of galaxy clustering and lensing – I. Theoretical framework (2012, methodology): “(46), but integrating from rp out to rout ≡ √ r2p + r2max, where rmax is the same value as used for the data (e.g., Zehavi et al. 2004, 2005, 2011; Abazajian et al. 2005; Tinker et al. 2005; Zheng et al. 2007, 2009; Yoo et al. 2009).”
THE CLUSTERING OF MASSIVE GALAXIES AT z ∼ 0.5 FROM THE FIRST SEMESTER OF BOSS DATA (2010, background): “The width of this “plateau” (M1/Mcut) is smaller than that found for less luminous systems at lower redshift, though it continues the trends seen in Zheng et al. (2009) for plateau width and satellite fraction as a function of luminosity.”
GALAXY CLUSTERING IN THE COMPLETED SDSS REDSHIFT SURVEY: THE DEPENDENCE ON COLOR AND LUMINOSITY (2010, methodology): “In the context of HOD models, Watson, Berlind, & Zentner (2011) discuss the physical processes that lead both to an approximate power law correlation function and to deviations from a power law (see also Benson et al. 2000, Berlind & Weinberg 2002, and Appendix A of Zheng et al. 2009).”