Galaxy groups in the 2dFGRS: the group-finding algorithm and the 2PIGG catalogue

By V. Eke, C. Baugh, Shaun Cole, Carlos S. Frenk, P. Norberg, J. Peacock, I. Baldry, Joss Bland-Hawthorn, T. Bridges, R. Cannon and 18 more. 2004

308 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The construction of a catalogue of galaxy groups from the 2-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS) is described. Groups are identified by means of a friends-offriends percolation algorithm which has been thoroughly tested on mock versions of the 2dFGRS generated from cosmological N-body simulations. The tests suggest that the algorithm groups all galaxies that it should be grouping, with an additional 40 per cent of interlopers. About 55 per cent of the � 190000 galaxies considered are placed into groups containing at least two members of which � 29000 are found. Of these, � 7000 contain at least four galaxies, and these groups have a median redshift of 0.11 and a median velocity dispersion of 260kms 1 . This 2dFGRS Percolation-Inferred Galaxy Group (2PIGG) catalogue represents the largest available homogeneous sample of galaxy groups. It is publicly available on the WWW.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7d45321f0d18872dad9eb80e8f887dbcfa110a89

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 Nuclear and High Energy Physics

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): the GAMA galaxy group catalogue (G3Cv1) (2011, methodology): “The group velocity dispersion, σFoF, is measured with the gapper estimator introduced by Beers et al. (1990), and used for velocity dispersion estimates in e.g. 2PIGG (Eke et al. 2004).”
Galaxy Groups in the SDSS DR4. I. The Catalog and Basic Properties (2007, background): “…the Las Campanas Redshift Survey (e.g. Tucker et al. 2000), the 2- degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (hereafter 2dFGRS; Merchán & Zandivarez 2002; Eke et al. 2004, Yang et al. 2005a; Tago et al. 2006; Einasto et al. 2007), the highredshift DEEP2 survey (Gerke et al. 2005), and the Two Micron…”
The colours of satellite galaxies in groups and clusters (2008, methodology): “In the case of a theoretical model, the true mass of the parent halo is known precisely, however in the case of the observational data one must make use of a mass proxy (e.g., Eke et al. 2004).”
On the Mass-to-Light Ratio of Large-Scale Structure (2004, result): “Analysis of the 2dF Percolated-Inferred Galaxy Group catalog (Eke et al. 2004) by Collister & Lahav (2004), which constitutes the largest group sample analyzed to date, yields α = 0.99, a value consistent with the preliminary results of the group multiplicity function for SDSS galaxies (A. Berlind,…”
The DESI Bright Galaxy Survey: Final Target Selection, Design, and Validation (2022, background): “It will also enable studies of galaxy groups (Eke et al. 2004), the connection between galaxies and dark matter (Tinker et al. 2011; Zu & Mandelbaum 2015; Xu et al. 2018), and the environmentdependent luminosity function (McNaught-Roberts et al. 2014; Eardley et al. 2015; Fang et al. 2019).”
Lightcone mock catalogues from semi-analytic models of galaxy formation – I. Construction and application to the BzK colour selection (2012, background): “C O distribution in order to test how faithfully the algorithm can recover these structures when working in redshift space (Eke et al. 2004; Robotham et al. 2011; Murphy et al. 2012).”
Galaxy And Mass Assembly (GAMA): the input catalogue and star–galaxy separation (2009, background): “…1978; de Lapparent et al. 1988; Norberg et al. 2002b; Zehavi et al. 2005) and the velocity dispersion of galaxies in groups and clusters can be used to infer dark-matter halo masses (Zwicky 1937; Huchra & Geller 1982; Moore et al. 1993; Carlberg et al. 1996; Eke et al. 2004; Berlind et al. 2006).”
Properties of galaxy groups in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey – II. Active galactic nucleus feedback and star formation truncation (2006, methodology): “…assumption regarding the M/Ls, and the group finder is more successful than the conventional FOF method (e.g. Huchra & Geller 1982; Ramella, Geller & Huchra 1989; Merchán & Zandivarez 2002; Eke et al. 2004; Berlind et al. 2006) in associating galaxies according to their common dark matter haloes.”
zCOSMOS: A Large VLT/VIMOS Redshift Survey Covering 0 < z < 3 in the COSMOS Field (2006, methodology): “Given the similarities of these two samples, we may for instance use the 2PIGG group catalog (Eke et al. 2004) to anticipate the properties of a group catalog constructed from zCOSMOSbright.”
A primer on hierarchical galaxy formation: the semi-analytical approach (2006, background): “The mass to light ratio is lowest for haloes of mass ≈ 1012h−1M⊙, and rises by a factor of ≈ 6 to lower and higher mass haloes (Yang, Mo & van den Bosch 2003; Eke et al. 2004a, 2004b).”
Galaxy Groups in the Third Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (2004, methodology): “The procedure follows until the center location remains unchanged (for more details see section 2 of D´ıaz et al. 2004).”
The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: power-spectrum analysis of the final data set and cosmological implications (2005, methodology): “In the third set of Hubble Volume mocks, groups and clusters were identified in the redshift space mock catalogues using the same friends-of-friends algorithm and parameters that Eke et al. (2004) used to define the 2PIGG catalogue of 2dFGRS groups and clusters.”
Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): survey diagnostics and core data release (2010, background): “…statistics (e.g. Bell et al. 2003; Baldry et al. 2006), the recent cosmic star formation history (e.g. Heavens et al. 2004), group catalogues (e.g. Eke et al. 2004), merger rates (e.g. Bell et al. 2006), quantification of largescale structure (e.g. Percival et al. 2001), galaxy clustering (e.g.…”
A halo-based galaxy group finder: calibration and application to the 2dFGRS (2004, methodology): “For comparison, the dashed lines indicate the completeness and contamination obtained using the standard FOF group finder of Eke et al. (2004a), with the linking lengths given by eq.”
The C4 Clustering Algorithm: Clusters of Galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (2005, methodology): “Previous authors have realized the necessity of such a detailed understanding of their clustering algorithms (e.g., Diaferio et al. 1999, Adami et al. 2000, Postman et al. 2002, Kim et al. 2002, Goto et al. 2002, and Eke et al. 2004).”
Properties of galaxy groups in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey – I. The dependence of colour, star formation and morphology on halo mass (2005, methodology): “…assumption regarding the mass-to-light ratios, and the group finder is more successful than the conventional FOF method (e.g. Huchra & Geller 1982; Ramella, Geller & Huchra 1989; Merchán & Zandivarez 2002; Eke et al. 2004a) in associating galaxies according to their common dark matter haloes.”
Percolation Galaxy Groups and Clusters in the SDSS Redshift Survey: Identification, Catalogs, and the Multiplicity Function (2006, methodology): “…et al. 1989; Moore et al. 1993; Ramella et al. 1997, 1999; Tucker et al. 2000; Giuricin et al. 2000; Ramella et al. 2002; Merchán & Zandivarez 2002; Eke et al. 2004), though alternative methods have also been used (see e.g., Tully 1987; Marinoni et al. 2002; Gerke et al. 2005; Yang et al. 2005).”
Flux- and volume-limited groups/clusters for the SDSS galaxies: catalogues and mass estimation (2014, methodology): “The ratio of the radial to the transversal LLs in our catalogues is slightly lower than in Eke et al. (2004) and higher than in Berlind et al. (2006).”
GAMA: towards a physical understanding of galaxy formation (2009, methodology): “The first science product from such a catalogue will be the halo mass function, and the expected precision from different survey areas is shown in figure 2, along with current constraints from the 2dFGRS survey (2PIGG: Eke et al. 2004).”