The redshift dependence of the structure of massive Λ cold dark matter haloes

By Liang Gao, J. Navarro, Shaun Cole, Carlos S. Frenk, Simon D. M. White, Volker Springel, Adrian Jenkins, A. F. Neto. 2007

434 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We use two very large cosmological simulations to study how the density profiles of relaxedCDM dark halos depend on redshift and on halo mass. We confirm that these profiles deviate slightly but systematically from the NFW form and are better approximated by the empirical formula, dlog ρ/dlog r ∝ r � , first used by Einasto to fit star counts in the Milky Way. The best-fit value of the additional shape parameter, α, increases gradually with mass, from α ∼ 0.16 for present-day galaxy halos to α ∼ 0.3 for the rarest and most massive clusters. Halo concentrations depend only weakly on mass at z = 0, and this dependence weakens further at earlier times. At z ∼ 3 the average concentration of relaxed halos does not vary appreciably over the mass range accessible to our simulations (M ∼3×10 11 h −1 M⊙). Furthermore, in our biggest simulation, the average concentration of the most massive, relaxed halos is constant at h c200i ∼ 3.5 to 4 for 0 ≤ z ≤ 3. These results agree well with those of Zhao et al (2003b) and support the idea that halo densities reflect the density of the universe at the time they formed, as proposed by Navarro, Frenk & White (1997). With their original parameters, the NFW prescription overpredicts halo concentrations at high redshift. This shortcoming can be reduced by modifying the definition of halo formation time, although the evolution of the concentrations of Milky Way mass halos is still not reproduced well. In contrast, the much-used revisions of the NFW prescription by Bullock et al. (2001) and Eke, Navarro & Steinmetz (2001) predict a steeper drop in concentration at the highest masses and stronger evolution with redshift than are compatible with our numerical data. Modifying the parameters of these models can reduce the discrepancy at high masses, but the overly rapid redshift evolution remains. These results have important implications for currently planned surveys of distant clusters.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/83371f8239f3f4b40d8d877023d776d1384b2759

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

DWARF GALAXY ANNIHILATION AND DECAY EMISSION PROFILES FOR DARK MATTER EXPERIMENTS (2014, background): “The outer profile then evolves as mass is accumulated by accretion in a hierarchical scenario (see e.g., Navarro et al. (1997); Wechsler et al. (2006); Gao et al. (2008)).”
NIHAO – IV: core creation and destruction in dark matter density profiles across cosmic time (2015, background): “The determination of the minimum radius above which the results of a simulation are not affected by the finite resolution is a non trivial task (e.g. Gao et al. 2008).”
THE SPLASHBACK RADIUS AS A PHYSICAL HALO BOUNDARY AND THE GROWTH OF HALO MASS (2015, methodology): “Similar to Diemer & Kravtsov (2014), we also fix α according to the relation with the peak height ν as calibrated by Gao et al. (2008),6 0.155 0.0095 .”
Galacticus: A Semi-Analytic Model of Galaxy Formation (2010, methodology): “We use the following fits to the Gao et al. (2008) results: A = −0.14 exp − ( log10 a + 0.050.35 )2 , (45) B = 2.646 exp − ( log10 a0.”
The influence of Sagittarius and the Large Magellanic Cloud on the stellar disc of the Milky Way Galaxy (2017, background): “Additionally, due to the scatter in the mass– concentration relation (Gao et al. 2008; Ludlow et al. 2014), we also consider two more progenitors that are twice as concentrated for the same given virial mass.”
Cosmological Parameters from Observations of Galaxy Clusters (2011, neutral): “In the mass range of galaxies to clusters, c ∝ M−ζ, with ζ ∼ 0.14 at z = 0 and ζ → 0 at z >∼ 3 (e.g., Gao et al. 2008).”
An Accurate Physical Model for Halo Concentrations (2018, background): “…power laws or other simple functions (Avila-Reese et al. 1999; Jing 2000; Colín et al. 2004; Dolag et al. 2004; Neto et al. 2007; Duffy et al. 2008; Gao et al. 2008; Macciò et al. 2008; Klypin et al. 2011; Muñoz-Cuartas et al. 2011; Bhattacharya et al. 2013; Dutton & Macciò 2014; Heitmann et al.…”
Lyα blobs as an observational signature of cold accretion streams into galaxies (2009, methodology): “• We use the gas density profile for hot gas that is in hydrostatic equilibrium with an NFW (Navarro et al. 1997) dark matter potential well with a concentration parameter c = 3.8 (Gao et al. 2008) at the virial temperature of the halo as derived by Makino et al (1998, their Eqs.”
A UNIVERSAL MODEL FOR HALO CONCENTRATIONS (2014, methodology): “…of halos (e.g., Avila-Reese et al. 1999; Jing 2000; Bullock et al. 2001; Colı́n et al. 2004; Dolag et al. 2004; Neto et al. 2007; Duffy et al. 2008; Gao et al. 2008; Macciò et al. 2008; Klypin et al. 2011; Muñoz-Cuartas et al. 2011; Bhattacharya et al. 2013; Dutton & Macciò 2014), usually…”
DARK MATTER HALO PROFILES OF MASSIVE CLUSTERS: THEORY VERSUS OBSERVATIONS (2011, methodology): “…hig value ofσ8 = 0.9 chosen for the MS. Note that three different analyses of the MS (and an associated smaller-volume, higher mass resolution run) have produced slightly discrepant results, differing from each other at the 10− 20% level (Neto et al. 2007; Gao et al. 2008; Hayashi & White 2008).”
ACCURATE UNIVERSAL MODELS FOR THE MASS ACCRETION HISTORIES AND CONCENTRATIONS OF DARK MATTER HALOS (2008, methodology): “The simulation results presented here are in good agreement with the results in Z03b and in Gao et al. (2008).”
CLASH: JOINT ANALYSIS OF STRONG-LENSING, WEAK-LENSING SHEAR, AND MAGNIFICATION DATA FOR 20 GALAXY CLUSTERS (2015, methodology): “The fitting formula given by Gao et al. (2008) yields αE ' 0.29 for our X-ray-selected subsample.”