Knebe, A. and Pearce, F. R. and Thomas, P. A. and Benson, A. and Blaizot, J. and Bower, R. and Carretero, J. and Castander, F. J. and Cattaneo, A. and Cora, S. A. and Croton, D. J. and Cui, W. and Cunnama, D. and De Lucia, G. and Devriendt, J. E. and Elahi, P. J. and Font, A. and Fontanot, F. and Garcia-Bellido, J. and Gargiulo, I. D. and Gonzalez-Perez, V. and Helly, J. and Henriques, B. and Hirschmann, M. and Lee, J. and Mamon, G. A. and Monaco, P. and Onions, J. and Padilla, N. D. and Power, C. and Pujol, A. and Skibba, R. A. and Somerville, R. S. and Srisawat, C. and Vega-Martínez, C. A. and Yi, S. K. (2015) 'nIFTy cosmology : comparison of galaxy formation models.', Monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society., 451 (4). pp. 4029-4059.
We present a comparison of 14 galaxy formation models: 12 different semi-analytical models and 2 halo occupation distribution models for galaxy formation based upon the same cosmological simulation and merger tree information derived from it. The participating codes have proven to be very successful in their own right but they have all been calibrated independently using various observational data sets, stellar models, and merger trees. In this paper, we apply them without recalibration and this leads to a wide variety of predictions for the stellar mass function, specific star formation rates, stellar-to-halo mass ratios, and the abundance of orphan galaxies. The scatter is much larger than seen in previous comparison studies primarily because the codes have been used outside of their native environment within which they are well tested and calibrated. The purpose of the ‘nIFTy comparison of galaxy formation models’ is to bring together as many different galaxy formation modellers as possible and to investigate a common approach to model calibration. This paper provides a unified description for all participating models and presents the initial, uncalibrated comparison as a baseline for our future studies where we will develop a common calibration framework and address the extent to which that reduces the scatter in the model predictions seen here.
|Full text:||(VoR) Version of Record|
Download PDF (2359Kb)
|Publisher Web site:||http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv1149|
|Publisher statement:||This article has been accepted for publication in Monthly notices of the Royal Astronomical Society ©: 2015 The Authors Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.|
|Date accepted:||18 May 2015|
|Date deposited:||24 March 2016|
|Date of first online publication:||30 June 2015|
|Date first made open access:||No date available|
Save or Share this output
|Look up in GoogleScholar|