Paper detail

The nature of compact groups of galaxies from cosmological simulations

The nature of compact groups (CGs) of galaxies, apparently so dense that the galaxies often overlap, is still a subject of debate: Are CGs roughly as dense in 3D as they appear in projection? Or are they caused by chance alignments of galaxies along the line-of-sight, within larger virialized groups or even longer filamentary structures? The nature of CGs is re-appraised using the z=0 outputs of three galaxy formation models, applied to the dissipationless Millennium Simulation. The same selection criteria are applied to mock galaxy catalogs from these models as have been applied by Hickson and co-workers in redshift space. We find 20 times as many mock CGs as the `HCGs' found by Hickson within a distance corresponding to 9000 km/s. This very low (5%) HCG completeness is caused by Hickson missing groups that were either faint, near the surface brightness threshold, of small angular size, or with a dominant brightest galaxy. We find that most velocity-filtered CGs are physically dense, regardless of the precise threshold used in 3D group size and line-of-sight elongation, and of the galaxy formation model used. This result also holds for mock CGs with the same selection biases as was found for the HCGs.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.