Paper detail

nIFTY galaxy cluster simulations III: The Similarity & Diversity of Galaxies & Subhaloes

We examine subhaloes and galaxies residing in a simulated LCDM galaxy cluster ($M^{\rm crit}_{200}=1.1\times10^{15}M_\odot/h$) produced by hydrodynamical codes ranging from classic Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH), newer SPH codes, adaptive and moving mesh codes. These codes use subgrid models to capture galaxy formation physics. We compare how well these codes reproduce the same subhaloes/galaxies in gravity only, non-radiative hydrodynamics and full feedback physics runs by looking at the overall subhalo/galaxy distribution and on an individual objects basis. We find the subhalo population is reproduced to within $\lesssim10\%$ for both dark matter only and non-radiative runs, with individual objects showing code-to-code scatter of $\lesssim0.1$ dex, although the gas in non-radiative simulations shows significant scatter. Including feedback physics significantly increases the diversity. Subhalo mass and $V_{max}$ distributions vary by $\approx20\%$. The galaxy populations also show striking code-to-code variations. Although the Tully-Fisher relation is similar in almost all codes, the number of galaxies with $10^{9}M_\odot/h\lesssim M_*\lesssim 10^{12}M_\odot/h$ can differ by a factor of 4. Individual galaxies show code-to-code scatter of $\sim0.5$ dex in stellar mass. Moreover, strong systematic differences exist, with some codes producing galaxies $70\%$ smaller than others. The diversity partially arises from the inclusion/absence of AGN feedback. Our results combined with our companion papers demonstrate that subgrid physics is not just subject to fine-tuning, but the complexity of building galaxies in all environments remains a challenge. We argue even basic galaxy properties, such as the stellar mass to halo mass, should be treated with errors bars of $\sim0.2-0.4$ dex.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access20 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.