Paper detail

To beta or not to beta: can higher-order Jeans analysis break the mass-anisotropy degeneracy in simulated dwarfs?

We test a non-parametric higher-order Jeans analysis method, GravSphere, on 32 simulated dwarf galaxies comparable to classical Local Group dwarfs like Fornax. The galaxies are selected from the APOSTLE suite of cosmological hydrodynamics simulations with Cold Dark Matter (CDM) and Self-Interacting Dark Matter (SIDM) models, allowing us to investigate cusps and cores in density distributions. We find that, for CDM dwarfs, the recovered enclosed mass profiles have a bias of no more than 10 per cent, with a 50 per cent scatter in the inner regions and a 20 per cent scatter near the half-light radius, consistent with standard mass estimators. The density profiles are also recovered with a bias of no more than 10 per cent and a scatter of 30 per cent in the inner regions. For SIDM dwarfs, the mass and density profiles are recovered within our 95 per cent confidence intervals, but are biased towards cuspy dark matter distributions. This is mainly due to a lack of sufficient constraints from the data. We explore the sources of scatter in the accuracy of the recovered profiles and suggest a $χ^2$ statistic to separate successful models from biased ones. Finally, we show that the uncertainties on the mass profiles obtained with GravSphere are smaller than those for comparable Jeans methods, and that they can be further improved if stronger priors, motivated by cosmological simulations, are placed on the velocity anisotropy. We conclude that GravSphere is a promising Jeans-based approach for modelling dark matter distributions in dwarf galaxies.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.