Paper detail

A Consistent Comparison of Bias Models using Observational Data

We investigate five different models for the dark matter halo bias, ie., the ratio of the fluctuations of mass tracers to those of the underlying mass, by comparing their cosmological evolution using optical QSO and galaxy bias data at different redshifts, consistently scaled to the WMAP7 cosmology. Under the assumption that each halo hosts one extragalactic mass tracer, we use a $χ^2$ minimization procedure to determine the free parameters of the bias models as well as to statistically quantify their ability to represent the observational data. Using the Akaike information criterion we find that the model that represents best the observational data is the Basilakos & Plionis (2001; 2003) model with the tracer merger extension of Basilakos, Plionis & Ragone-Figueroa (2008) model. The only other statistically equivalent model, as indicated by the same criterion, is the Tinker et al. (2010) model. Finally, we find an average, over the different models, dark matter halo mass that hosts optical QSOs of: $M_h\simeq 2.7 (\pm 0.6) \times 10^{12} h^{-1} M_{\odot}$, while the corresponding value for optical galaxies is: $M_h\simeq 6.3 (\pm 2.1) \times 10^{11} h^{-1} M_{\odot}$.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.