Numerical study of halo concentrations in dark-energy cosmologies

By Klaus Dolag, M. Bartelmann, F. Perrotta, C. Baccigalupi, L. Moscardini, Massimo Meneghetti, G. Tormen. 2003

234 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We study the concentration parameters, their mass dependence and redshift evolution, of dark-matter halos in different dark-energy cosmologies with constant and time-variable equation of state, and compare them with standard ACDM and OCDM models. We find that previously proposed algorithms for predicting halo concentrations can be well adapted to dark-energy models. When centred on the analytically expected values, halo concentrations show a log-normal distribution with a uniform standard deviation of ∼0.2. The dependence of averaged halo concentrations on mass and redshift permits a simple fit of the form (1 + z) c = c 0 (M/M 0 ) α , with α -0.1 throughout. We find that the cluster concentration depends on the dark energy equation of state at the cluster formation redshift z coll through the linear growth factor D + (z coll ). As a simple correction accounting for dark-energy cosmologies, we propose scaling c 0 from ACDM with the ratio of linear growth factors, c 0 → c 0 D + (Z coll )/D +.ACDM (z coll ).

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8de893aed0e841882dd1cf1495a9e52a4738c762

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

Citations in the corpus

CLASH-VLT: The mass, velocity-anisotropy, and pseudo-phase-space density profiles of the z = 0.44 galaxy cluster MACS J1206.2-0847 (2013, unknown): “1999a; Dolag et al. 2004; Wong & Taylor 2012).”
Statistics of Physical Properties of Dark Matter Clusters (2005, background): “Hence, low-mass halos forming in low-density regions will have a lower concentration than predicted by the Dolag et al. (2004) Mvir-c relation.”
SIMULATION OF THE COSMIC EVOLUTION OF ATOMIC AND MOLECULAR HYDROGEN IN GALAXIES (2009, methodology): “Most numerical models predict that chalo scales with the virial mass Mvir, defined as the mass inside the radius rvir, according to a power-law (e.g. Navarro et al. 1997; Bullock et al. 2001; Dolag et al. 2004; Hennawi et al. 2007).”
Radiative Transfer Simulations of Cosmic Reionization. I. Methodology and Initial Results (2006, methodology): “The concentration parameter is approximately given by (see Dolag et al. 2004 and references therein) c(Mvir; z) ¼ 7:5 1þ z Mvir M 0:1 ; ð2Þ where the nonlinearmass isM ¼ 2:09 ; 1012 M h 1 for the chosen cosmology.”
DARK MATTER HALO PROFILES OF MASSIVE CLUSTERS: THEORY VERSUS OBSERVATIONS (2011, background): “…the standard deviation of the concentration distribution depends on cosmology, redshift, or the dynamical state, in the same way as the mean concentration, confirming the initial finding of Dolag et al. (2004) from a small sample of simulated halos, but spanning multiple dark energy cosmologies.”
LoCuSS: Subaru Weak Lensing Study of 30 Galaxy Clusters (2009, background): “5, which roughly matches the ΛCDM simulation predictions for cluster-scale halos (e.g., Bullock et al. 2001; Dolag et al. 2004; Neto et al. 2007).”
Accurate halo-model matter power spectra with dark energy, massive neutrinos and modified gravitational forces (2016, methodology): “Without this amplitude shift, the (Bullock et al. 2001 with Dolag et al. 2004 augmentation) relation predicts similar c(M) for all models, but there are some small differences due to the different growth history in each model.”
One simulation to fit them all - changing the background parameters of a cosmological N-body simulation (2009, background): “Thus the mean collapse redshift of haloes of given mass will also be different (Dolag et al. 2004; Jennings et al. 2009).”
The mass–concentration–redshift relation of cold dark matter haloes (2013, background): “9, where we show how the median concentrations of 106, 1010 and 1014 h−1M⊙ halos at z = 0 depend on the matter-density parameter, ΩM, and the fluctuation amplitude σ8, for a Universe with flat geometry (i.e., ΩΛ = 1−ΩM; the other cosmological parameters are assumed to take the Planck cosmology value”
The structural and scaling properties of nearby galaxy clusters. I. The universal mass profile (2005, background): “A weak variation in the concentration is expected from low to high mass clusters, reflecting differences in the formation epochs of low and high mass haloes (Navarro et al. 1997; Bullock et al. 2001; Dolag et al. 2004).”
Ram pressure stripping the hot gaseous haloes of galaxies in groups and clusters (2007, background): “This test is motivated by the fact that in cosmological simulations there is a large degree of intrinsic scatter in the concentration parameter for a system of fixed mass (e.g., Dolag et al. 2004; Neto et al. 2007).”
The flattening of the concentration–mass relation towards low halo masses and its implications for the annihilation signal boost (2013, methodology): “1, we also display a typical concentration scatter of 0.14 dex centered on the P12 model (shaded blue region) following previous estimates, e.g., B01; Wechler et al. (2002); Dolag et al. (2004); M08.”
The dark matter haloes of massive, relaxed galaxy clusters observed with Chandra (2006, methodology): “Although the normalization c0 at 8× 1014 h−1M⊙ and the redshift evolution, b, are consistent with the Shaw et al. (2006) simulations and Dolag et al. (2004) model, the mass-concentration relation is noticeably steeper.”
Virial Scaling of Massive Dark Matter Halos: Why Clusters Prefer a High Normalization Cosmology (2007, methodology): “We use a factor 2DM(< r200)/ 2DM(< r500) ¼ 0:84 0:06, where the central value assumes an NFW profile with concentration14 c200 ¼ 4:8 (Dolag et al. 2004), and the quoted error reflects varying the concentration between values of 3 and 15.”
Dark matter halo concentrations in the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe year 5 cosmology (2008, background): “Because the c(M) relation is very sensitive to the primordial power spectrum (e.g. ENS; Alam, Bullock, & Weinberg 2002; Dolag et al. 2004; Kuhlen et al. 2005), it is not clear whether the MS results accurately describe our Universe.”
On the efficiency and reliability of cluster mass estimates based on member galaxies (2006, background): “(2004), and the exponent of the relation is derived from Dolag et al. (2004), under the assumption that the mass scales with the third power of the velocity dispersion.”