2017
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx1183
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accurate mass and velocity functions of dark matter haloes

Abstract: N-body cosmological simulations are an essential tool to understand the observed distribution of galaxies. We use the MultiDark simulation suite, run with the Planck cosmological parameters, to revisit the mass and velocity functions. At redshift z = 0, the simulations cover four orders of magnitude in halo mass from ∼ 10 11 M with 8,783,874 distinct halos and 532,533 subhalos. The total volume used is ∼515 Gpc 3 , more than 8 times larger than in previous studies. We measure and model the halo mass function, … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
53
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
8
53
0
Order By: Relevance
“…N-body simulations provide information on the evolution and spatial distribution of dark-matter halos within cosmological volumes. The abundance-matching (Klypin et al 2016;Comparat et al 2017) at a snapshot redshift z = 0.75. It shows the positions of particles (e.g.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…N-body simulations provide information on the evolution and spatial distribution of dark-matter halos within cosmological volumes. The abundance-matching (Klypin et al 2016;Comparat et al 2017) at a snapshot redshift z = 0.75. It shows the positions of particles (e.g.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The MultiDark-Planck 2 (MDPL2) simulations have a bigger box size, 1000 h −1 Mpc on the side, and a mass resolution of 1.51 × 10 9 h −1 M . Details on the SMDPL and MDPL2 simulations can be found in Klypin et al (2016) and Comparat et al (2017). The Rockstar halo finder (Behroozi et al 2013a) has been applied to the SMDPL and MDPL2 simulations to identify halos and flag those (sub-halos) that lie within the virial radius of a more massive host-halo.…”
Section: N-body Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(51) is clearly the same integral without Q, and the 1σ variance is computed as σ Q = Q 2 − Q 2 . To compute the formation rate one needs the halo mass function, i.e., the co-moving number density of halo per halo mass bin, as provided by state-of-the-art N-body simulations; we adopt the determination by Tinker et al (2008; see also Watson et al 2013;Bocquet et al 2016;Comparat et al 2017Comparat et al , 2019. Since we are mainly concerned with the properties of ETGs residing at the center of halos, we actually exploit the galaxy halo mass function, i.e., the mass function of halos hosting one individual galaxy (though the difference with respect to the halo mass function emerge only for z 1 and M H several 10 13 M ).…”
Section: Average Over Formation Redshiftmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The set of eROSITA mocks is made public here 1 2 N-BODY DATA We use the halo catalogues of the MDPL2 simulation 2 (Planck cosmology, 3840 3 particles of mass 2.2 × 10 9 M , 1475.5 Mpc on the side, Klypin et al 2016) post-processed with the rockstar merger trees software (Behroozi et al 2013). The halo mass function is correct to a few percent down to halo masses of M vir ∼ 10 11 M (Comparat et al 2017). In this analysis, we consider distinct haloes more massive than 2 × 10 11 M .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%