Paper detail

What do simulations predict for the galaxy stellar mass function and its evolution in different environments?

We present a comparison between the observed galaxy stellar mass function and the one predicted from the De Lucia & Blaizot (2007) semi-analytic model applied to the Millennium Simulation, for cluster satellites and galaxies in the field (meant as a wide portion of the sky, including all environments), in the local universe (z~0.06) and at intermediate redshift (z~0.6), with the aim to shed light on the processes which regulate the mass distribution in different environments. While the mass functions in the field and in its finer environments (groups, binary and single systems) are well matched in the local universe down to the completeness limit of the observational sample, the model over-predicts the number of low mass galaxies in the field at z~0.6 and in clusters at both redshifts. Above M_*=10^10.25 M_sun, it reproduces the observed similarity of the cluster and field mass functions, but not the observed evolution. Our results point out two shortcomings of the model: an incorrect treatment of cluster-specific environmental effects and an over-efficient galaxy formation at early times (as already found by e.g. Weinmann et al. 2012). Next, we consider only simulations. Using also the Guo et al. (2011) model, we find that the high mass end of the mass functions depends on halo mass: only very massive halos host massive galaxies, with the result that their mass function is flatter. Above M_*=10^9.4 M_sun, simulations show an evolution in the number of the most massive galaxies in all the environments. Mass functions obtained from the two prescriptions are different, however results are qualitatively similar, indicating that the adopted recipes to model the evolution of central and satellite galaxies still have to be better implemented in semi-analytic models.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.