Julian Onions — Page 2

arXiv2012

Subhaloes gone Notts: Spin across subhaloes and finders

We present a study of a comparison of spin distributions of subhaloes found associated with a host halo. The subhaloes are found within two cosmological simulation families of Milky Way-like galaxies, namely the Aquarius and GHALO simulations. These two simulations use different gravity codes and cosmologies. We employ ten different substructure finders, which span a wide range of methodologies from simple overdensity in configuration space to full 6-d phase space analysis of particles.We subject the results to a common post-processing pipeline to analyse the results in a consistent manner, recovering the dimensionless spin parameter. We find that spin distribution is an excellent indicator of how well the removal of background particles (unbinding) has been carried out. We also find that the spin distribution decreases for substructure the nearer they are to the host halo's, and that the value of the spin parameter rises with enclosed mass towards the edge of the substructure. Finally subhaloes are less rotationally supported than field haloes, with the peak of the spin distribution having a lower spin parameter.

astro-ph.CO↗

arXiv2012

SubHaloes going Notts: The SubHalo-Finder Comparison Project

We present a detailed comparison of the substructure properties of a single Milky Way sized dark matter halo from the Aquarius suite at five different resolutions, as identified by a variety of different (sub-)halo finders for simulations of cosmic structure formation. These finders span a wide range of techniques and methodologies to extract and quantify substructures within a larger non-homogeneous background density (e.g. a host halo). This includes real-space, phase-space, velocity-space and time- space based finders, as well as finders employing a Voronoi tessellation, friends-of-friends techniques, or refined meshes as the starting point for locating substructure.A common post-processing pipeline was used to uniformly analyse the particle lists provided by each finder. We extract quantitative and comparable measures for the subhaloes, primarily focusing on mass and the peak of the rotation curve for this particular study. We find that all of the finders agree extremely well on the presence and location of substructure and even for properties relating to the inner part part of the subhalo (e.g. the maximum value of the rotation curve). For properties that rely on particles near the outer edge of the subhalo the agreement is at around the 20 per cent level. We find that basic properties (mass, maximum circular velocity) of a subhalo can be reliably recovered if the subhalo contains more than 100 particles although its presence can be reliably inferred for a lower particle number limit of 20. We finally note that the logarithmic slope of the subhalo cumulative number count is remarkably consistent and <1 for all the finders that reached high resolution. If correct, this would indicate that the larger and more massive, respectively, substructures are the most dynamically interesting and that higher levels of the (sub-)subhalo hierarchy become progressively less important.

astro-ph.CO↗