Paper detail

SCORCH. III. Analytical Models of Reionization with Varying Clumping Factors

In the Simulations and Constructions of the Reionization of Cosmic Hydrogen (SCORCH) project, we compare analytical models of the hydrogen ionization fraction with radiation-hydrodynamic simulations. We derive analytical models of the mass-weighted hydrogen ionization fraction from the local ionization balance equations as a more accurate alternative to the widely adopted model based on the volume filling factor. In particular, our model has a recombination term quadratic in the ionization fraction, which is consistent with the two-body interaction nature of recombination. Then, we use the radiation-hydrodynamic simulations to study the clumping factors needed to solve the analytical equations, and provide accurate fitting functions. We find that the ionized hydrogen clumping factors from our radiative transfer simulations are significantly different than those from other simulations that use a uniform photoionization background. In addition to redshift dependence, we also see the dependence of ionized hydrogen clumping factor on ionization fraction, and we incorporate this into our fits. We calculate the reionization histories using our analytical models and clumping factors and compare with widely adopted models, and all of our models achieve $<7\%$ difference from simulation results while the other models have $>20\%$ deviations. The Thomson optical depths from reionization calculated from our analytical models result in $<5\%$ deviation from simulations, while the previous analytical models have $>20\%$ difference in and could result in biased conclusions of the IGM reionization.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.