Paper detail

How robust are predictions of galaxy clustering?

We use the Millennium Simulation database to compare how different versions of the Durham and Munich semi-analytical galaxy formation models populate dark matter haloes with galaxies. The models follow the same physical processes but differ in how these are implemented. All of the models we consider use the Millennium N-body Simulation; however, the Durham and Munich groups use independent algorithms to construct halo merger histories. We compare the predicted halo occupation distributions (HODs) and correlation functions for galaxy samples defined by stellar mass, cold gas mass and star formation rate. The predictions for the HOD are remarkably similar for samples ranked by stellar mass. The predicted bias averaged over 5-25 Mpc/h is consistent between models to within 10%. At small pair separations there is a difference in the predicted clustering. This arises because the Durham models allow some satellite galaxies to merge with the central galaxy in a halo when they are still associated with resolved subhaloes. The agreement between the models is less good for samples defined by cold gas mass or star formation rate, with the small scale clustering differing by an order of magnitude, reflecting the uncertainty in the modelling of star formation. The model predictions in these cases are qualitatively similar, with a markedly shallower slope for the correlation function than is found for stellar mass selected samples and with the HOD displaying an asymmetric peak for central galaxies. We provide illustrative parametric fits to the HODs predicted by the models. Our results reveal the current limitations on how well we can predict galaxy bias in a fixed cosmology, which has implications for the interpretation of constraints on the physics of galaxy formation from galaxy clustering measurements and the ability of future galaxy surveys to measure dark energy.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.