4.7 Article

THE ROCKSTAR PHASE-SPACE TEMPORAL HALO FINDER AND THE VELOCITY OFFSETS OF CLUSTER CORES

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 762, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/762/2/109

关键词

dark matter; methods: numerical

资金

  1. NASA HST Theory grant [HST-AR-12159.01-A]
  2. National Science Foundation [NSF AST-0908883]
  3. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-76SF00515]
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  5. Division Of Astronomical Sciences [0908883] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a new algorithm for identifying dark matter halos, substructure, and tidal features. The approach is based on adaptive hierarchical refinement of friends-of-friends groups in six phase-space dimensions and one time dimension, which allows for robust (grid-independent, shape-independent, and noise-resilient) tracking of substructure; as such, it is named rockstar (Robust Overdensity Calculation using K-Space Topologically Adaptive Refinement). Our method is massively parallel (up to 10(5) CPUs) and runs on the largest current simulations (>10(10) particles) with high efficiency (10 CPU hours and 60 gigabytes of memory required per billion particles analyzed). A previous paper has shown rockstar to have excellent recovery of halo properties; we expand on these comparisons with more tests and higher-resolution simulations. We show a significant improvement in substructure recovery compared to several other halo finders and discuss the theoretical and practical limits of simulations in this regard. Finally, we present results that demonstrate conclusively that dark matter halo cores are not at rest relative to the halo bulk or substructure average velocities and have coherent velocity offsets across a wide range of halo masses and redshifts. For massive clusters, these offsets can be up to 350 km s(-1) at z = 0 and even higher at high redshifts. Our implementation is publicly available at http://code.google.com/p/rockstar.

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