“ Testing the predictive power of semi-analytic models using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey” Juan Esteban González Birmingham, 24/06/08 Collaborators: Cedric.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Low-frequency radio maps for the REXCESS cluster sample S.R. Heidenreich, University of Southampton In collaboration with J.H. Croston, University of Southampton;
Advertisements

Color-magnitude relations of disk galaxies: observations vs. model predictions Ruixiang Chang ( Shanghai Astronomical Observatory ) Collaborators: Jinliang.
Quenched and Quenching Galaxies at Low to High Redshifts S.M. Faber & UCSC and CANDELS collaborators Dekel60 Fest December 13, 2011 M31: UV GALEX.
18 July Monte Carlo Markov Chain Parameter Estimation in Semi-Analytic Models Bruno Henriques Peter Thomas Sussex Survey Science Centre.
The Role of Dissipation in Galaxy Mergers Sadegh Khochfar University of Oxford.
Xiaohu Yang Shanghai Astronomical Observatory Partner group of MPA Collaborators: Yu Wang (SHAO), H.J. Mo (UMass), F.C. van den Bosch (MPIA), Neal Katz.
AGN in hierarchical galaxy formation models Nikos Fanidakis and C.M. Baugh, R.G. Bower, S. Cole, C. Done, C. S. Frenk Accretion and ejection in AGN, Como,
Galaxy Formation, Theory and Modelling Shaun Cole (ICC, Durham) 25 th October 2007 ICC Photo: Malcolm Crowthers Collaborators: Geraint Harker John Helly.
Galaxy and Mass Power Spectra Shaun Cole ICC, University of Durham Main Contributors: Ariel Sanchez (Cordoba) Steve Wilkins (Cambridge) Imperial College.
Studying the mass assembly and luminosity gap in fossil groups of galaxies from the Millennium Simulation Ali Dariush, University of Birmingham Studying.
Dark Halos of Fossil Groups and Clusters Observations and Simulations Ali Dariush, Trevor Ponman Graham Smith University of Birmingham, UK Frazer Pearce.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS Mass determination Kauffmann et al. determined masses using SDSS spectra (Hdelta & D4000) Comparison with our determination: Relative.
Star-Formation in Close Pairs Selected from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Overview The effect of galaxy interactions on star formation has been investigated.
Towards the Grand Unification of AGNs in Hierarchical Cosmologies Nikos Fanidakis and C.M. Baugh, R.G. Bower, S. Cole, C. Done, C.S. Frenk January 30,
Massive galaxies in massive datasets M. Bernardi, J. Hyde and E. Tundo M. Bernardi, J. Hyde and E. Tundo University of Pennsylvania.
Dark Matter and Galaxy Formation Section 4: Semi-Analytic Models of Galaxy Formation Joel R. Primack 2009, eprint arXiv: Presented by: Michael.
Exploring the Stellar Populations of Early-Type Galaxies in the 6dF Galaxy Survey Philip Lah Honours Student h Supervisors: Matthew Colless Heath Jones.
Redshift Evolution Of The Morphology Density Relation
Bell, E. F et al “Nearly 5000 distant Early-type galaxies in COMBO-17: A Red Sequence and its evolution since z~1” Presented by: Robert Lindner (Bob)‏
First Results from an HST/ACS Snapshot Survey of Intermediate Redshift, Intermediate X-ray Luminosity Clusters of Galaxies: Early Type Galaxies and Weak.
GALAXIES, GALAXIES, GALAXIES! A dime a dozen… just one of a 100,000,000,000! 1.Galaxy Classification Ellipticals Dwarf Ellipticals Spirals Barred Spirals.
AGN in hierarchical galaxy formation models Nikos Fanidakis and C.M. Baugh, R.G. Bower, S. Cole, C. Done, C. S. Frenk Physics of Galactic Nuclei, Ringberg.
Cosmological constraints from models of galaxy clustering Abstract Given a dark matter distribution, the halo occupation distribution (HOD) provides a.
Evolution of Galaxy groups Michael Balogh Department of Physics University of Waterloo.
An Accretion Disc Model for Quasar Optical Variability An Accretion Disc Model for Quasar Optical Variability Li Shuang-Liang Li Shuang-Liang Shanghai.
The Baryon Induced Transformation of CDM Halos Mario G. Abadi Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, CONICET Argentina In collaboration with Julio Navarro and.
I N T R O D U C T I O N The mechanism of galaxy formation involves the cooling and condensation of baryons inside the gravitational potential well provided.
Σπειροειδείς γαλαξίες
What can we learn from the luminosity function and color studies? THE SDSS GALAXIES AT REDSHIFT 0.1.
How to start an AGN: the role of host galaxy environment Rachel Gilmour (ESO Chile & IfA, Edinburgh) Philip Best (Edinburgh), Omar Almaini & Meghan Gray.
What can we learn from galaxy clustering? David Weinberg, Ohio State University Berlind & Weinberg 2002, ApJ, 575, 587 Zheng, Tinker, Weinberg, & Berlind.
The Evolution of Quasars and Massive Black Holes “Quasar Hosts and the Black Hole-Spheroid Connection”: Dunlop 2004 “The Evolution of Quasars”: Osmer 2004.
Effects of Dust on the Observed SEDs of Galaxies Andrew Schurer INAF/SISSA & MAGPOP.
Full Spectral Analysis of Galaxies - Are we there yet? Ben Panter, Edinburgh
RADIO OBSERVATIONS IN VVDS FIELD : PAST - PRESENT - FUTURE P.Ciliegi(OABo), Marco Bondi (IRA) G. Zamorani(OABo), S. Bardelli (OABo) + VVDS-VLA collaboration.
Maxime KUBRYK, IAP, Ph.D student advisors: Nikos PRANTZOS, IAP Lia ATHANASSOULA, OAMP LIA-ORIGINS, May 2012.
Understanding formation of galaxies from their environments Yipeng Jing Shanghai Astronomical Observatory.
Galaxy Growth: The role of environment Simone Weinmann (MPA Garching) Collaborators: Guinevere Kauffmann, Frank van den Bosch, Anna Pasquali, Dan McIntosh,
The coordinated growth of stars, haloes and large-scale structure since z=1 Michael Balogh Department of Physics and Astronomy University of Waterloo.
The Environmental Effect on the UV Color-Magnitude Relation of Early-type Galaxies Hwihyun Kim Journal Club 10/24/2008 Schawinski et al. 2007, ApJS 173,
“Nature and Descendants of Sub-mm and Lyman-break Galaxies in Lambda-CDM” Juan Esteban González Collaborators: Cedric Lacey, Carlton Baugh, Carlos Frenk,
Theoretical Predictions about the Cold- Warm Gas Size around Cluster Galaxies using MgII systems Iván Lacerna VII Reunión Anual, SOCHIAS 2009 January 14.
Scaling Relations in HI Selected Star-Forming Galaxies Gerhardt R. Meurer The Johns Hopkins University Gerhardt R. Meurer The Johns Hopkins University.
Clusters at low redshift University of Durham University of Waterloo (Canada) University of Durham Michael Balogh.
Γαλαξίες – 3 Υπερμαζικές Μαύρες Τρύπες στα κέντρα γαλαξιών 15 Ιανουαρίου 2013.
Galaxies in the UKIDSS Large Area Survey Jon Loveday Anthony Smith Celine Eminian University of Sussex.
Modeling the dependence of galaxy clustering on stellar mass and SEDs Lan Wang Collaborators: Guinevere Kauffmann (MPA) Cheng Li (MPA/SHAO, USTC) Gabriella.
Luminosity Functions from the 6dFGS Heath Jones ANU/AAO.
Redshift Evolution Of The Morphology Density Relation Peter Capak B. Mobasher, R. Abraham, R. Ellis, K. Sheth, N. Scoville Postdoctoral Fellow California.
MNRAS, submitted. Galaxy evolution Evolution in global properties reasonably well established What drives this evolution? How does it depend on environment?
Observational Test of Halo Model: an empirical approach Mehri Torki Bob Nichol.
Zheng Dept. of Astronomy, Ohio State University David Weinberg (Advisor, Ohio State) Andreas Berlind (NYU) Josh Frieman (Chicago) Jeremy Tinker (Ohio State)
Major dry-merger rate and extremely massive major dry-mergers of BCGs Deng Zugan June 31st Taiwan.
Environmental Dependence of Brightest Cluster Galaxy Evolution Sarah Brough, Liverpool John Moores University Chris Collins, Liverpool John Moores University.
Assembly of Massive Elliptical Galaxies
Luminous Red Galaxies in the SDSS Daniel Eisenstein ( University of Arizona) with Blanton, Hogg, Nichol, Tegmark, Wake, Zehavi, Zheng, and the rest of.
March 27, 2008 Milan Raicevic ICC, Durham University Studying the role of inhomogeneous reionization in galaxy formation with GALFORM and SimpleX Collaborators:
Semi-analytical model of galaxy formation Xi Kang Purple Mountain Observatory, CAS.
The dependence on redshift of quasar black hole masses from the SLOAN survey R. Decarli Università dell’Insubria, Como, Italy A. Treves Università dell’Insubria,
How are galaxies influenced by their environment? rachel somerville STScI Predictions & insights from hierarchical models with thanks to Eric Bell the.
The Formation and Evolution of Galaxies Michael Balogh University of Waterloo.
Speaker: Dave Wilman (MPE) Collaborators: Mike Balogh (Waterloo), George Hau, Richard Bower (Durham); John Mulchaey, Gus Oemler (Carnegie); Ray Carlberg.
The Radio Properties of Type II Quasars PLAN Type II quasars Motivations Our sample Radio observations Basic radio properties Compare our results with.
AGN in the VVDS (Bongiorno, Gavignaud, Zamorani et al.) 1.What has been done: main results on Type 1 AGN evolution and accretion properties of faint AGN.
Maracalagonis, 24/05/ Semi-Analytic Modeling of Galaxy Formation PhD student: Elena Ricciardelli Supervisor: prof. Alberto Franceschini.
From: The evolution of star formation activity in galaxy groups
THE FIRST GALAXY FORMATION MODEL WITH THE TP-AGB:
SDSS-IV MaNGA: The Spatial Distribution of Star Formation and its Dependence on Mass, Structure and Environment (arXiv: v1) 胡 宁
Borislav Nedelchev et al. 2019
Presentation transcript:

“ Testing the predictive power of semi-analytic models using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey” Juan Esteban González Birmingham, 24/06/08 Collaborators: Cedric Lacey, Carlton Baugh, Carlos Frenk.

Motivation Modelling the universe: –Understanding the physical processes responsible for galaxy formation and evolution, Semi-analytical models reproduce some range of properties. Test predictions with large observational datasets for an statistically meaningful comparison (SDSS, 2dF), Durham GALFORM semi-analytical galaxy formation model. Sloan Digital Sky Survey can help us to test the model in a snapshot of the universe at local redshift.

OUTLINE Galform: –Physical processes, –Baugh 2005 & Bower 2006 models, SDSS: –Spectroscopic sample, bands, Comparisons: –Luminosity function, colours, morphologies and sizes.

Galform: Processes included in the model: –gas cooling, –star formation, supernova feedback, –galaxy mergers, –chemical enrichment, –stellar population evolution, –dust extinction and emission. Cole, Lacey, Baugh & Frenk, 2000, MNRAS, 319, 168

Baugh 2005 & Bower 2006 Baugh et al 2005 version of GALFORM, which assumes a variable IMF, has been shown to successfully reproduce the local optical and IR luminosity functions, as well as the abundance of sub-mm and Lyman-break galaxies at high redshift. On the other hand, the Bower et al 2006 version of GALFORM, which incorporates AGN feedback, better reproduces the evolution of the K-band luminosity and stellar mass functions.

A Little About the Observational Data… SDSS, Survey to map a quarter of the sky in five bands (u,g,r,i,z) with a subsample of measured spectra for galaxies with r Pet < We use mainly a low redshift (z<0.05) catalogue from the DR4 ( 6670 square degrees, spectra ) SDSS DR4

The primary measure of flux used for galaxies is the SDSS Petrosian magnitude (in the absence of seeing it measures a constant fraction of a galaxy’s light regardless of distance): Ratio: Petrosian Flux: ~100% of the flux in pure exponential profiles. ~80% of the flux in pure de Vaucouleurs profiles. R=0.2 Petrosian Magnitude

Surface brightness profile for galaxies: - In SDSS: concentic rings, - In Galform: The total profile includes a disk and a bulge component. for bulges, “de Vaucouleurs” profile:for discs, exponential profile: Early type galaxiesLate type galaxies

Petrosian Flux ~100% of the flux in pure exponential profiles (late type). ~80% of the flux in pure de Vaucouleurs profiles (early type). B/T: Bulge to Total Luminosity B/T=1, pure bulge galaxy B/T=0, pure disk galaxy Fraction of Flux

Luminosity Function and Galaxy Colours

Luminosity Function Baugh 2005 Bower 2006

Feedback effects shape the luminosity function. Total Luminosity Function Models over-predict the number of high luminosity galaxies. Median redshift = 0.035

Stronger SN feedback help to suppress the formation of red faint galaxies in Bower Median redshift = Luminosity Function separated by colour g-r BLUEINTERMEDIATERED

A bimodality is seen in the distribution of galaxies from the SDSS. The upper and lower dashed lines represent a red and blue population. Colour distributions of galaxies as function of luminosity Baldry et al Bimodal distribution of the sample in colour vs. absolute magnitude.

SDSS analysis: Baldry et al Colour distributions of galaxies as function of luminosity Black histogram show the distribution predicted from the model. Gaussians show the different blue and red population. Red population dominates at all magnitudes for Baugh 2005 model Baugh 2005 model BRIGHT FAINT SDSS GALFORM

SDSS analysis: Baldry et al Colour distributions of galaxies as function of luminosity Black histogram show the distribution predicted from the model. Gaussians show the different blue and red population. We can see a blue population as well for faint magnitudes. Bower 2006 model BRIGHT FAINT SDSS GALFORM

Comparing the distribution in colours vs. magnitude The contribution of each galaxy to the density is weighted by its luminosity. A bimodality is observed. SDSS Baugh05 model Bower06 model SDSS DR4, median redshift=0.035 Contours: regions containing 68% and 95% of the density.

Morphology Classifier 1: The concentration index The “concentration index” of galaxies, defined as c ≡ r90/r50 has been showed well correlated with visual morphological classifications for nearby and large galaxies. Concentration index for pure de Vaucouleurs profile (c≈3.3) Concentration index for pure exponential profile (c≈2.3) B/T: Bulge to Total Luminosity B/T=1, pure bulge galaxy B/T=0, pure disk galaxy

Morphology Classifier 2: The Sérsic index It can be fitted a radial dependence for the surface brightness in the form: Sérsic index n~1: exponential profile (pure disk galaxy) Sérsic index n~4: de Vaucouleur profile (pure bulge galaxy)

Sérsic Index: Fitting to model galaxies We find the parameters A, r 0 and n for the Sérsic profile by minimizing χ 2 with respect to the known Disk + Bulge profile.

Morphology by Sérsic Index disk dominated, n<2.5 GALFORM bulge dominated, n>2.5 ∆ SDSS We can compare the fraction of different morphology galaxies given by the Sérsic index “n” in bins of Luminosity with the SDSS data. Change in the dominating population at different magnitudes. SDSS DR4, median redshift=0.035 FRACTION Baugh 2005 Bower 2006

Comparing the distribution in colour g-r, magnitude and Sérsic Index. SDSS Contours: regions containing 68% and 95% of the density. The contribution of each galaxy to the density is weighted by its luminosity. Baugh05 model Bower06 model SDSS DR4, median redshift=0.035 Bimodality in colour, magnitude and morphology is seen as well in the models.

Size distribution (r 50,Pet ): DISK DOMINATED GALAXIES

Discs form by cooling of gas initially in the halo The size of the disc is determined by the angular momentum of the halo gas which cools. Estimating the size of the discs

Size distribution for disk dominated galaxies. Late Type (disk dominated): c<2.86 SDSS analysis: Shen et al Black histograms show the distribution of the Galform prediction. Red Gaussians represent the SDSS distribution. Median sizes are very similar compared to SDSS data. Baugh 2005 model FAINT BRIGHT GALFORM SDSS

Sizes vs. Magnitude, late type galaxies Good agreement for late type galaxies for Baugh Bower 2006 model shows a different trend predicting low luminosity galaxies too big. Separating by concentration index Big Triangles: SDSS Baugh 2005Bower 2006 Disk sizes are very sensitive to feedback Gradually return of the gas in Bower 2006 late type (disk dominated)

Size distribution: BULGE DOMINATED GALAXIES

Estimating the size of the bulges The size of the spheroid formed in a merger is computed in the model using: M1, M2: Masses of the merging components. r1,r2: half-mass radii of the merging components. c: form factor; c=0.5 f orbit is an uncertain parameter from theory ( f orbit =1). Binding energy, Virial theorem and Energy conservation, Orbital energy at the moment of merging,

Size distribution for bulge dominated galaxies. Early Type (bulge dominated ): c>2.86 SDSS analysis: Shen et al The histograms show the distribution of the Galform predicted. The Gaussians represent the SDSS distribution. Baugh 2005 model BRIGHT FAINT GALFORM SDSS For faint magnitudes the model predicts too big galaxies

Both models predict bigger sizes for low luminosity galaxies. Separating by concentration index Big squares: SDSS DR4 Baugh 2005Bower 2006 Bulge sizes are less sensitive to feedback early type (bulge dominated)

Estimating the size of the bulges The size of the spheroid formed in a merger is computed in the model using: M1, M2: Masses of the merging components. r1,r2: half-mass radii of the merging components. c: form factor; c=0.5 f orbit is an uncertain parameter from theory ( f orbit =1). Binding energy, Virial theorem and Energy conservation, Orbital energy,

Testing different f orbit for early type galaxies Both models predict galaxy sizes too big for low luminosity galaxies. f orbit = -0.5, 0, 1 and 2 Best results with f orbit =0 for Baugh 2005 model and with f orbit =-0.5 for Bower 2006 model. Separating by concentration index Big squares: SDSS Baugh 2005Bower 2006

Conclusions AGN feedback better shapes the observed luminosity function, Models predict too many galaxies in the bright end in the r Pet band, Fractions of morphology type by Sérsic index agree well with the observed data, Bimodality in colours, magnitudes and morphologies is seen as well in the models, Disk sizes very sensitive to feedback, Faint bulge dominated galaxies are predicted too big, These problems highlight the need to better understand both the effects of feedback processes and the assembly of galaxy bulges by mergers.

Sérsic Index Problems with the dependence in the “concentration index” with seeing. Median can changes from around 0.37 to (Blanton et al. 2003) It can be fitted a radial dependence for the surface brightness in the form: Sérsic index n~1: late type Sérsic index n~4: early type Dependence of the inverse concentration index on seeing.

Median colours as Function of Luminosity, Baugh model The colours of early type galaxies (de Vaucouleurs, n>3) agrees very well. The late type galaxies (exponential, n<1.5) seem to be too red for low luminosities. SDSS DR4, median redshift=0.035

Median colours as Function of Luminosity, Bower model Colour bimodality is clearly seen in the Bower model. SDSS DR4, median redshift=0.035