Paper detail

Discriminating Topology in Galaxy Distributions using Network Analysis

(abridged) The large-scale distribution of galaxies is generally analyzed using the two-point correlation function. However, this statistic does not capture the topology of the distribution, and it is necessary to resort to higher order correlations to break degeneracies. We demonstrate that an alternate approach using network analysis can discriminate between topologically different distributions that have similar two-point correlations. We investigate two galaxy point distributions, one produced by a cosmological simulation and the other by a Lévy walk. For the cosmological simulation, we adopt the redshift $z = 0.58$ slice from Illustris (Vogelsberger et al. 2014A) and select galaxies with stellar masses greater than $10^8$$M_\odot$. The two point correlation function of these simulated galaxies follows a single power-law, $ξ(r) \sim r^{-1.5}$. Then, we generate Lévy walks matching the correlation function and abundance with the simulated galaxies. We find that, while the two simulated galaxy point distributions have the same abundance and two point correlation function, their spatial distributions are very different; most prominently, \emph{filamentary structures}, absent in Lévy fractals. To quantify these missing topologies, we adopt network analysis tools and measure diameter, giant component, and transitivity from networks built by a conventional friends-of-friends recipe with various linking lengths. Unlike the abundance and two point correlation function, these network quantities reveal a clear separation between the two simulated distributions; therefore, the galaxy distribution simulated by Illustris is not a Lévy fractal quantitatively. We find that the described network quantities offer an efficient tool for discriminating topologies and for comparing observed and theoretical distributions.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors2 topics

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.