Astrophysics > Astrophysics of Galaxies
[Submitted on 31 Jul 2020 (this version), latest version 19 Jul 2021 (v2)]
Title:Quenched fractions in the IllustrisTNG simulations: comparison with observations and other theoretical models
View PDFAbstract:We make an in-depth comparison of the IllustrisTNG simulations with observational data on the quenched fractions of central and satellite galaxies, for $M_*=10^{9-12}M_{\odot}$ at $0\leq z\leq3$. We study how analysis methodologies and observational effects impact this comparison. This includes measurement choices -- aperture, quenched definition, star formation rate (SFR) indicator timescale -- as well as observational uncertainties and sample selection issues: projection effects, satellite/central misclassification, and host mass distribution sampling. The definition used to separate quenched and star-forming galaxies produces differences of up to 70 (30)$\%$ for centrals (satellites) $>\sim 10^{10.5} M_{\odot}$. Increasing the aperture within which SFR is measured can suppress the quenched fractions by up to $\sim50\%$, particularly at $z\gtrsim2$. Proper consideration of the stellar and host mass distributions is crucial: naive comparisons to volume-limited samples from simulations lead to misinterpretation of the quenched fractions as a function of $z$ by up to 20$\%$. Including observational uncertainties to theoretical values of $M_*$ and SFR changes the quenched fraction values and their trend and/or slope with mass. Taking projected rather than 3D distances for satellites decreases the quenched fractions by up to 10$\%$ due to field contamination. Comparing with data, TNG produces quenched fractions broadly consistent with observations. TNG predicts quenched fractions up to $\sim80-90\%$ for centrals at $z\leq2-3$, in line with recent observations, and notably higher than other theoretical models. The quantitative agreement of TNG and SDSS for satellite quenched fractions in groups and clusters depends strongly on the galaxy and host mass range. Our mock comparison between TNG and SDSS highlights the importance of properly accounting for observational effects and biases.
Submission history
From: Martina Donnari Dr. [view email][v1] Fri, 31 Jul 2020 18:00:00 UTC (2,114 KB)
[v2] Mon, 19 Jul 2021 09:44:00 UTC (1,417 KB)
Current browse context:
astro-ph.GA
Change to browse by:
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv Recommender
(What is IArxiv?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.