4.7 Article

Redshift-space clustering of SDSS galaxies - luminosity dependence, halo occupation distribution, and velocity bias

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv1966

关键词

galaxies: distances and redshifts; galaxies: haloes; galaxies: statistics; cosmology: observations; cosmology: theory; large-scale structure of Universe

资金

  1. 973 Programme [2015CB857003]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences
  3. NSF [AST-1208891]
  4. NASA [NNX14AC89G]
  5. STFC [ST/L00075X/1]
  6. European Research Council through ERC [DEGAS-259586]
  7. CWRU ACES+ ADVANCE Opportunity Grant
  8. Giacconi Fellowship
  9. Spanish MICINNs Consolider-Ingenio Programme [MultiDark CSD2009-00064]
  10. MINECO Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa Programme [SEV-2012-0249]
  11. MINECO [AYA2014-60641-C2-1-P]
  12. MINECO (Spain) [AYA2012-31101, FPA2012-34694]
  13. Spanish MultiDark Consolider Project [CSD2009-00064]
  14. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  15. National Science Foundation
  16. US Department of Energy
  17. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  18. Japanese Monbukagakusho
  19. Max Planck Society
  20. Higher Education Funding Council for England
  21. American Museum of Natural History
  22. Astrophysical Institute Potsdam
  23. University of Basel
  24. University of Cambridge
  25. Case Western Reserve University
  26. University of Chicago
  27. Drexel University
  28. Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study
  29. Japan Participation Group
  30. Johns Hopkins University
  31. Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics
  32. Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology
  33. Korean Scientist Group
  34. Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST)
  35. Los Alamos National Laboratory
  36. Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA)
  37. Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA)
  38. New Mexico State University
  39. Ohio State University
  40. University of Pittsburgh
  41. University of Portsmouth
  42. Princeton University
  43. United States Naval Observatory
  44. University of Washington
  45. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  46. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1208891] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  47. STFC [ST/L00075X/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  48. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/L00075X/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present the measurements and modelling of the small-to-intermediate scale (similar to 0.1-25 h(-1) Mpc) projected and three-dimensional redshift-space two-point correlation functions (2PCFs) of local galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 7. We find a clear dependence of galaxy clustering on luminosity in both projected and redshift spaces, generally being stronger for more luminous samples. The measurements are successfully interpreted within the halo occupation distribution (HOD) framework with central and satellite velocity bias parameters to describe galaxy kinematics inside haloes and to model redshift-space distortion effects. In agreement with previous studies, we find that more luminous galaxies reside in more massive haloes. Including the redshift-space 2PCFs helps tighten the HOD constraints. Moreover, we find that luminous central galaxies are not at rest at the halo centres, with the velocity dispersion about 30 per cent that of the dark matter. Such a relative motion may reflect the consequence of galaxy and halo mergers, and we find that central galaxies in lower mass haloes tend to be more relaxed with respect to their host haloes. The motion of satellite galaxies in luminous samples is consistent with their following that of the dark matter. For faint samples, satellites tends to have slower motion, with velocity dispersion inside haloes about 85 per cent that of the dark matter. We discuss possible applications of the velocity bias constraints on studying galaxy evolution and cosmology. In the appendix, we characterize the distribution of galaxy redshift measurement errors, which is well described by a Gaussian-convolved double exponential distribution.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据