Paper detail

Comparison of the VIMOS-VLT Deep Survey with the Munich semi-analytical model - I. Magnitude counts, redshift distribution, colour bimodality, and galaxy clustering

This paper presents a detailed comparison between high-redshift observations from the VIMOS-VLT Deep Survey (VVDS) and predictions from the Munich semi-analytical model of galaxy formation. In particular, we focus this analysis on the magnitude, redshift, and colour distributions of galaxies, as well as their clustering properties. We constructed 100 quasi-independent mock catalogues, using the output of the semi-analytical model presented in De Lucia & Blaizot (2007).We then applied the same observational selection function of the VVDS-Deep survey, so as to carry out a fair comparison between models and observations. We find that the semi-analytical model reproduces well the magnitude counts in the optical bands. It tends, however, to overpredict the abundance of faint red galaxies, in particular in the i' and z' bands. Model galaxies exhibit a colour bimodality that is only in qualitative agreement with the data. In particular, we find that the model tends to overpredict the number of red galaxies at low redshift and of blue galaxies at all redshifts probed by VVDS-Deep observations, although a large fraction of the bluest observed galaxies is absent from the model. In addition, the model overpredicts by about 14 per cent the number of galaxies observed at 0.2<z<1 with I_AB<24. When comparing the galaxy clustering properties, we find that model galaxies are more strongly clustered than observed ones at all redshift from z=0.2 to z=2, with the difference being less significant above z~1. When splitting the samples into red and blue galaxies, we find that the observed clustering of blue galaxies is well reproduced by the model, while red model galaxies are much more clustered than observed ones, being principally responsible for the strong global clustering found in the model. [abridged]

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access40 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.

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.