1 / 48

Hierarchical Clustering

Hierarchical Clustering. Leopoldo Infante Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Reunión Latinoamericana de Astronomía Córdoba, septiembre 2001. Introduction The Two-point Correlation Function Clustering of Galaxies at Low Redshifts - SDSS results-

bryga
Download Presentation

Hierarchical Clustering

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hierarchical Clustering Leopoldo Infante Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Reunión Latinoamericana de Astronomía Córdoba, septiembre 2001

  2. Introduction The Two-point Correlation Function Clustering of Galaxies at Low Redshifts -SDSS results- Evolution of Clustering -CNOC2 results- Clustering of Small Groups of Galaxies The ro - d diagram

  3. Rich Clusters Bias Groups Bias Galaxies Bias

  4. How do we characterizeclustering? Correlation Functions and/or Power Spectrum

  5. Random Distribution 1-Point 2-Point N-Point dV1 Clustered Distribution r 2-Point dV2

  6. Continuous Distribution Fourier Transform Since P depends only on k

  7. In Practice 2-Dimensions - Angles Estimators B A

  8. The co-moving Correlation Length

  9. Assumed Power Law 3-D Correlation Function Proper Correlation distance Clustering evolution index Proper Correlation length Assumed Power Law Angular Correlation Function

  10. Proper Correlation Length

  11. Inter-system Separation, d Space density of galaxy systems Mean separation of objects As richer systems are rarer, d scales with richness or mass of the system

  12. CLUSTERINGMeasurements from Galaxy CatalogsandPredictions from Simulations

  13. 2-dF Catalog, 16.419 galaxies, south strip.

  14. Sloan Digital Sky Survey • 2.5m Telescope • Two Surveys • Photometric • Spectroscopic • Expect • 1 million galaxies with spectra • 108 galaxies with 5 colors • Current results • Two nights • Equatorial strip, 225 deg.2 • 2.5 million galaxies

  15. Mock Catalogs

  16. Angular Clustering • Correlations on a given angular scale probe physical scales of all sizes. • Fainter galaxies are on average further away, so probe larger physical scales

  17. Power law over 2 orders of magnitude • Correlation in faintest bin correspond to larger physical scales •  less clustered

  18. CNOC2 Survey Measures clustering evolution up to z  0.6 for Late and Early type galaxies. 1.55 deg.2 ~ 3000 galaxies 0.1 < z < 0.6 Redshifts for objects with Rc< 21.5 Rc band, MR < -20  rp<10h-1Mpc SEDs are determined from UBVRcIc photometry

  19. Projected Correlation Length

  20. Clustering of Galaxy Clusters Richer clusters are more strongly clustered. Bahcall & Cen, 92, Bahcall & West, 92  ro=0.4 dc=0.4 nc-1/3 However this has been disputed Incompleteness in cluster samples (Abell, etc.) APM cluster sample show weaker trend

  21. N body simulations • Bahcall & Cen, ‘92, ro dc • Croft & Efstathiou, ‘94, ro dc but weaker • Colberg et al., ‘00, (The Virgo Consortium) • 109 particles • Cubes of 2h-1Gpc (CDM) 3h-1Gpc (CDM) CDM =1.0 =0.0 h=0.5 =0.21 8=0.6 CDM =0.3 =0.7 h=0.5 =0.17 8=0.9

  22. CDM dc = 40, 70, 100, 130 h-1Mpc Dark matter

  23. Clustering and Evolution of Small Groups of Galaxies

  24. Objective: Understand formation and evolution of structures in the universe, from individual galaxies, to galaxies in groups to clusters of galaxies. • Main data: SDSS, equatorial strip, RCS, etc. • Secondary data: Spectroscopy to get redshifts. • Expected results: dN/dz as a function of z, occupation numbers (HOD) and mass. • Derive ro and d=n-1/3  Clustering Properties

  25. Bias • The galaxy distribution is a bias tracer of the matter distribution. • Galaxy formation only in the highest peaks of density fluctuations. • However, matter clusters continuously. • In order to test structure formation models we must understand this bias.

  26. Halo Occupation Distribution, HOD Bias, the relation between matter and galaxy distribution, for a specific type of galaxy, is defined by: • The probability, P(N/M), that a halo of virial mass M contains N galaxies. • The relation between the halo and galaxy spatial distribution. • The relation between the dark matter and galaxy velocity distribution. This provides a knowledge of the relation between galaxies and the overall distribution of matter, the Halo Occupation Distribution.

  27. In practice, how do we measure HOD? • Detect pairs, triplets, quadruplets etc. n2 in SDSS catalog. • Measure redshifts of a selected sample. • With z and N we obtain dN/dz We are carrying out a project to find galaxies in small groups using SDSS data.

  28. Collaborators: M. Strauss N. Bahcall J. Knapp M. Vogeley R. Kim R. Lupton & Sloan consortium

  29. Note strips • The Data • Equatorial strip, 2.5100 deg2 • Seeing  1.2” to 2” • Area = 278.13 deg2 • Mags. 18 < r* < 20 • Ngalaxies = 330,041

  30. De-reddened Galaxy Counts Thin lines are counts on each of the 12 scanlines dlogN/dm=0.46 Turnover at r* 20.8

  31. Selection of Galaxy Systems • Find all galaxies within angular separation 2”<<15” (~37h-1kpc) • and 18 < r* < 20 • Merge all groups which have members in common. • Define a radius group: RG • Define distance from the group o the next galaxy; RN • Isolation criterion: RG/RN  3 Sample 1175 groups with more than 3 members 15,492 pairs Mean redshift = 0.22  0.1

  32. Galaxy pairs, examples Image imspection shows that less than 3% are spurious detections

  33. Galaxy groups, examples

  34. Main Results arcsec arcsec A = 13.54  0.07  = 1.76 A = 4.94  0.02  = 1.77

  35. Secondary Results galaxies pairs triplets • Triplets are more clustered than pairs • Hint of an excess at small angular scales

  36. Space Clustering Properties-Limber’s Inversion- Calculate correlation amplitudes from () Measure redshift distributions, dN/dz De-project () to obtain ro, correlation lengths Compare ro systems with different HODs SDSS CNOC2

  37. The ro - d relation Amplitude of the correlation function Correlation scale Mean separation As richer systems are rarer, d scales with richness or mass of the system

  38. Rich Abell Clusters: • Bahcall & Soneira 1983 • Peacock & West 1992 • Postman et al. 1992 • Lee &Park 2000 • APM Clusters: • Croft et al. 1997 • Lee & Park 2000 EDCC Clusters: Nichol et al. 1992 • X-ray Clusters: • Bohringer et al. 2001 • Abadi et al. 1998 • Lee & Park 2000 LCDM (m=0.3, L=0.7, h=0.7) SCDM (m = 1, L=0, h=0.5) Governato et al. 2000 Colberg et al. 2000 Bahcall et al. 2001 • Groups of Galaxies: • Merchan et al. 2000 • Girardi et al. 2000

  39. CONCLUSIONS We use a sample of 330,041 galaxies within 278 deg2, with magnitudes 18 < r* < 20, from SDSS commissioning imaging data. We select isolated small groups. We determine the angular correlation function. We find the following: • Pairs and triplets are ~ 3 times more strongly clustered than galaxies. • Logarithmic slopes are  = 1.77 ± 0.04 (galaxies and pairs) • () is measured up to 1 deg. scales, ~ 9 h-1Mpc at <z>=0.22. No breaks. • We find ro= 4.2 ± 0.4 h-1Mpc for galaxies and 7.8 ± 0.7 h-1Mpc for pairs • We find d = 3.7 and 10.2 h-1Mpc for galaxies and pairs respectively. • LCDM provides a considerable better match to the data Follow-up studies dN/dz and photometric redshifts. Select groups over > 1000 deg2 area from SDSS

More Related