adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: The B-band luminosity vs. average DM density within an aperture of one effective radius for different galaxy morphologies. Colored with error bars: our dE sample. The effective radii we used to calculate ﹩\overline{{\rho }_{\mathrm{DM}}}﹩ are in the z band and tabulated in VW–I. Red points: large ETGs in the Coma cluster as measured by J. Thomas et al. (2009). Following J. Thomas et al. (2009), we obtained their effective radii from I. Jorgensen et al. (1995) and D. Mehlert et al. (2000) and assumed a Coma distance of 100 Mpc. Yellow points: Sc-Im galaxies from J. Kormendy & K. C. Freeman (2016); this sample includes galaxies in different groups within the local volume of 84 Mpc. Gray squares: the dSphs of the Milky Way from A. Burkert (2015). Dashed lines: for the LTG and ETG samples, we also show fitted scaling relations in the same color. For the samples of A. Burkert (2015) and J. Kormendy & K. C. Freeman (2016), we plot the core densities, as they are stated in these studies instead of recalculating the averaged density within the 1r e aperture. This is a good approximation of ﹩\overline{{\rho }_{\mathrm{DM}}}﹩ because these studies all use halo models with a central core (with minor differences in the model definitions) but find core radii that are considerably larger than one stellar effective radius. Therefore, if we were to correct for the small radial decrease within 1r e, it would shift the density only slightly to lower values, which would not change our conclusions (see the text). Between different studies, we expect the systematic differences/uncertainties in the measurement of r e, and in the probed candidate halo models (Section 3), to have more of an impact. The dEs do not follow the scaling relations suggested by large ETGs. While they are closer to the DM densities of Sc-Im galaxies, which (presumably) are the progenitors of dEs, they are offset to higher densities. This could indicate that the progenitors of dEs have assembled earlier and/or in a higher-density background.
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: Left panel: the average logarithmic power-law slope γ tot of the total mass distribution evaluated between 0.1r e and 1r e vs. the luminosity-weighted velocity dispersion σ e within one effective radius. Colored dots: our dE sample. Diamonds: the massive ETGs, part of the ATLAS3D-survey (M. Cappellari et al. 2011), for which we obtained the slopes of model 1 in A. Poci et al. (2017). Their aperture varies slightly for each galaxy since it depends on the FOV coverage. But for the majority, their γ tot is essentially measured between 0.1r e and 1r e. Following A. Poci et al. (2017), we differentiate between ATLAS3D galaxies with good data quality (black diamonds) and poor quality (red diamonds). This data quality for each ETG was evaluated in M. Cappellari et al. (2013b). Green squares: the power-law slopes obtained from M. W. Auger et al. (2010) for the strong lensing ETGs, which are part of the SLACS survey (A. S. Bolton et al. 2008; M. W. Auger et al. 2009). Magenta crosses: the total slopes calculated from the mass profiles of J. Thomas et al. (2007b), which were obtained with Schwarzschild, which are based on an earlier version of the axisymmetric orbit code we use in this study. Right panel: the total slope γ tot vs. the DM fraction f DM enclosed within 1r e for the same data that was shown in the left panel. For the SLACS survey, we obtained the DM fraction from S. Posacki et al. (2014). For more published data of giant ETGs and comparison with cosmological simulations, see also Figure 11 of C. Derkenne et al. (2023).
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: The intrinsic axisymmetric flattening of the DM halo  q DM vs. the corresponding (radially averaged) q * of the stars for the dEs. Also included are the dynamically recovered axis ratios of the dSph of the Milky Way (gray squares) from K. Hayashi et al. (2020). We indicate the expected  q DM from the Illustris simulations (K. T. E. Chua et al. 2019) for their DMO runs (gray bar), for the full hydrodynamical run in the dE regime M * ∼ 109 M ☉ (red bar) and for higher masses (1011 M ☉) at which their halos are roundest (green bar). They describe the halo triaxial by minor/intermediate axis ratios q and s; to compare it to our axisymmetric values, the mean of q and s is shown here. The bar height represents the 25th–75th percentiles of their galaxies. The placement of the bars on the q *-axis is arbitrary because they do not resolve q *. However, from the analysis of more massive ETGs in Illustris TNG100 by C. Pulsoni et al. (2021), we may expect q DM ≥ q * with a large range of stellar flattening 0.2 ≤ q * ≤ 0.9. Congruent with these simulations, our dEs have q DM ≥ q *, but have even rounder halos than statistically expected.
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: Left side: the (spherically averaged) matter densities ρ of each dE obtained from the best dynamical model we found. From top to bottom: DM density, stellar density (including the ϒ*(r)), total mass density. We indicate the location of the (stellar) effective radius of each dE (see VW–I) by the point that overlaps the corresponding curve. Right side: the corresponding (volume) averaged slopes η within spheres of radius r (see Equation (4)) as a function of r. While the halo slopes stem from a parametric Zhao description (i.e., the slopes are smooth by definition), the stellar component is nonparametric and is completely determined by the photometric deprojection, inclination, and ϒ*-gradient of the best-fit model. At a radius of 10″, i.e., within the region where we expect the DM to be constrained best by the data (Section 3.3), the typical statistical 1σ error of η DM is σ  η  = 0.26. The individual errors resolved for each dE can be inferred from Figures 10 and 9.
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: The mass-weighted total density slope γ MW (Equation (6)) of dEs and LTGs within 1r e vs. stellar mass M * (left panel) and DM fraction f DM (right panel). Colored dots: our dE sample. All of the literature data shown here are from C. Tortora et al. (2019), who analyzed the slopes of the following three galaxy samples. Blue stars: the LTG data originate from a subsample of the SPARC survey (F. Lelli et al. 2016), which includes LTGs ranging from S0 to Im. Green squares: the dEs of the SMAKCED sample (E. Toloba et al. 2014; C. Tortora et al. 2016), which are also part of Virgo cluster. As a reference, we also include the location of “ordinary” ETGs in the left panel (gray diamonds); they stem from the ETGs of the SPIDER survey (F. La Barbera et al. 2010; C. Tortora et al. 2012). For these ETGs, only the sample medians binned in different mass bins are shown; the error bars indicate the 1σ percentiles of the more than 4000 ETGs (see C. Tortora et al. 2019).
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: The same as Figure 9 but for correlation of DM with cluster environment and stellar angular momentum. Top to bottom: the projected distance to the central cluster galaxy M87 Δr sky,M87 (a proxy for the environment the galaxies inhabit; see VW–I). The total stellar angular momentum j *. The stellar angular momentum parameter λ  e/2 (see VW–I for details) within the half the effective radius, which is not to be confused with the often used halo spin parameter (P. J. E. Peebles 1969).
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: Correlations of the DM halos with stellar population parameters. In the small boxes of each panel, we show the corresponding Spearman correlation coefficient. Left panels: the average DM density ﹩\overline{{\rho }_{\mathrm{DM}}}﹩ (Equation (5)) inside the sphere of radius 0.8 kpc. Right panels: the average DM slope (Equation (4)) inside the same sphere. Top to bottom: the age of the stellar population. The metallicity [Z/H]. A low abundance ratio [Mg/Fe] is an indicator for a prolonged star formation history (see VW–I).
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: Left panel: the total enclosed mass of each dE vs. radius (solid lines). Dashed lines show the corresponding black hole masses of the best dynamical models. The spatial resolution of the VIRUS-W data is mostly limited by the fiber size and the seeing and is effectively of the order of ∼2″. Hence, we do not expect to resolve central black holes. While our models (formally) recovered black hole masses (Figure 3) as shown here, their contribution to the total enclosed mass within the spatial resolution limit is negligible. Therefore, we consider the best models to be essentially degenerate with any models with black hole masses M • ≲ 5 × 106 M ☉. Right panel: the cumulated DM fraction within radius r. With some exceptions, the potential within the central few arcseconds of the dEs is dominated by the stellar mass.
Paper: The VIRUS-dE Survey. II. Cuspy and Round Halos in Dwarf Ellipticals—A Result of Early Assembly?
Authors: Mathias Lipka, Jens Thomas, Roberto Saglia, Ralf Bender, Maximilian Fabricius, Christian Partmann
Figure caption: Correlation uncertainty of the average enclosed DM density ﹩\overline{{\rho }_{\mathrm{DM}}}﹩ with slope η DM. Shown are the 25 best dynamical models we found for each dE.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: The effect of the delay time on the distribution of stars throughout cosmic history. We use rejection sampling of one million stars to acquire a sample of stars reflecting the assumed SFRD (P. Madau & T. Fragos 2017). Then, we add 10 Myr, 100 Myr, and 1 Gyr to their birth ages. The left panel shows the original distribution and the distributions of the stars shifted by the three different example delay times. In the right panel, we normalize each distribution and then divide by the normalized SFRD. In doing so, we can see how the delay time effects cause the population of stars at low redshift to be greater than the SFRD.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: The BBH delay time distributions from our fiducial model for binaries formed at redshifts 0.2, 2, and 6. (Left) The distributions normalized to an area of one. The bin widths are log-uniformly and uniformly spaced in the left and right panels, respectively. (Right) The three gray hatched regions are the portion of each distribution that would not merge by z = 0. The lowest t delay bins (those with t delay ≲ 10 Myr) suffer from sampling uncertainty.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: The median delay times of BBH mergers for each model in grid A as a function of redshift. The median only includes BBHs that merge in a Hubble time for each redshift.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: BBH merger rate as a function of redshift compared to toy model merger rates assuming a scaled SFRD (left), a scaled SFRD with constant delay times (middle), and a scaled SFRD with a t −1 delay time distribution (right). All simulations are normalized to the same intrinsic merger rate R merge,0. We assumed minimum delay times for the middle and right panel of 20 Myr. Labels and colors are the same as in Figure 1.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: The assumed SFRD colored by the stars’ initial metallicity, Z  i , for the different MSSFRs from Figure 10. The MSSFR labels are indicated above each panel, and the dotted lines show the redshift location of a few mean metallicities (i.e., the average metallicity of stars formed at a given redshift).
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: BBH merger rate as a function of redshift compared to toy models assuming a scaled SFRD with a constant delay time of 20 Myr (top row) and a delay time distribution of d n/d t ∝ 1/t with a minimum delay time of 20 Myr (bottom row). Labels and colors are the same as in Figure 1.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: Same as Figure 1 but for BNS mergers.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: The same as Figure 1 except for variations in the metallicity-specific SFRD instead of binary physics. The panels show the fiducial metallicity-specific SFRD model (red), a variation assuming the L. Strolger et al. (2004) SFRD, the M. Furlong et al. (2015) GSMF, and the X. Ma et al. (2016) MZR (green), as well as a variation assuming a P. Madau & T. Fragos (2017) SFRD, the B. Panter et al. (2004) GSMF, and the N. Langer & C. A. Norman (2006) with an offset MZR.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: Same as Figure 1 but for BHNS mergers.
Paper: The Binary Black Hole Merger Rate Deviates from the Cosmic Star Formation Rate: A Tug of War between Metallicity and Delay Times
Authors: Adam P. Boesky, Floor S. Broekgaarden, Edo Berger
Figure caption: The percentage contributions of each formation channel (as described in F. S. Broekgaarden et al. 2021) for the merger rates as a function of redshift of all models in grid A.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Galactocentric radius of all disrupted debris in the model catalog (light solid line), all accreted streams surviving until present day (dark solid line), and all streams surviving until present day from in situ formed GCs (dashed line) for the MW1 catalog. Streams are defined as the objects which survived the streaminess criterion from Figure 6. The black histogram shows the known fully disrupted GCs in the MW from Galstreams. There are more than 20 times as many predicted as detected streams, and most of the streams at large R Gal are from accreted objects.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: The number of GCs (purple) and fully disrupted GCs (gray) from the MW1 catalog as a function of Galactocentric radius, binned in widths of 4.5 kpc. There are 190 GCs in total while there are 10,349 fully disrupted GCs. The dashed vertical lines shows R Gal = 3 kpc, and the labels note how many objects are located within and beyond this radius, which is roughly the size of the bulge. The dashed histogram shows the 168 observed MW GCs from the updated H. Baumgardt et al. (2019) catalog.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: The absolute value of the z-fraction of the angular momentum vs. the streaminess parameter for a subset of 300 of the fully disrupted objects in the MW1 catalog. For each object in ∣L  z /L∣ vs. Δ0 space, we overplot the model stream in Galactic coordinates as a visualization of our criterion. The dashed lines indicate the boundaries ∣L  z /L∣ = 0.95 and Δ0 = 2°. The bottom right quadrant shows fully disrupted objects which survive as streams until present day, based on our selection criterion.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: The gray histogram shows the Galactocentric radius of each fully disrupted GC from the MW catalog (same as in Figure 2). Note that many of these stream candidates will not be observable at present day. The black histogram shows the mean Galactocentric distance for all observed fully disrupted GC streams in the MW calculated based on the stream track information provided in Galstreams (C. Mateu 2023), where we have excluded dwarf streams (nine total) and stellar streams emerging from known GCs (10 total).
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Left: the number of fully disrupted GCs which were formed in situ from the MW1 catalog vs. the time it takes for each of the objects to fully disrupt after their formation. Right: the number of fully disrupted ex situ (accreted) GCs in the MW1 catalog vs. the time it takes to fully disrupt each object after accretion. If this value is negative, the cluster was fully disrupted prior to accretion. The shaded region shows the objects, which we include in our further analysis of the stream candidates.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Ratio of cluster mass at the time of accretion and at birth as a function of time spent in the host dwarf galaxy prior to accretion onto the central MW-like halo, for all accreted clusters in the model catalog. Cluster mass decreases approximately linearly with the time spent in the original host galaxy. The solid line shows the median trends, while the shaded region shows the 16–84th percentiles.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: The apocenter distribution (solid gray) and pericenter distribution (dashed gray) of all fully disrupted clusters (stream candidates) from the MW1 GC catalog.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Top: comparison between the MW model’s Galactocentric distribution of GCs (purple) and fully disrupted GCs (gray, left) and the best-match M31 model’s galactocentric distributions of GCs (light blue) to fully disrupted GCs (dark blue, right) for catalogs including GCs with initial masses of m GC > 105 M ⊙. There is a large population of potential stream candidates at larger galactocentric distances in M31. Bottom: comparison between MW1's Galactocentric distributions of GCs (purple) and fully disrupted objects (gray) (left) and a dwarf model’s average galactocentric distributions of GCs (dark teal) to streams (light teal) for catalogs including GCs with initial masses of m GC > 104 M ⊙. There is a large number of predicted potential stream candidates in the dwarf model. Note that the lower left distributions are the same as presented in Figure 2.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Top: the surviving model streams which are located at R Gal > 15 kpc, for all stars with LSST g-band photometry g < 27.5. Each of these streams have their main-sequence turnoff more than 1 mag above the LSST limit for resolved stars. Bottom: the tracks of the observed MW stream population located at R Gal > 15 kpc from Galstreams. There are potentially a large population of GC streams in the MW yet to be detected at large Galactocentric radii.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Left: the eccentricities vs. pericenter distances for all model debris (teal), for all debris which survives as streams (pink), and for all surviving model streams which have R Gal > 15 kpc (black). The surviving model streams have higher eccentricities and pericenters than the fully phase-mixed debris. Right: total energy vs. z-angular momentum. The surviving model streams have higher energies but random directions of motion around the Galaxy. Note that we only included objects which were not fully disrupted prior to accretion (see Figure 5).
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Orbital diagnostics of all fully disrupted objects from the MW1 catalog (top row), MW2 catalog (middle row), and MW3 catalog (bottom row). Left panels: the total energy of each fully disrupted object (black) and each failed mock stream (red) as a function of its z-angular momentum. Middle panels: the number of objects as a function of their absolute value of their z-angular momentum. Right panels: the number of objects as a function of their orbital pericenter. MW1 has much fewer failed objects, and fewer fully disrupted objects in the central region of the potential as compared to MW2 and MW3.
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: Comparison between the circular velocity for the BFE potential from TNG50 at present day (black) compared to the three-component analytical circular velocity curves for MW1 (left), MW2 (middle), and MW3 (right).
Paper: Forecasting the Population of Globular Cluster Streams in Milky Way–type Galaxies
Authors: Sarah Pearson, Ana Bonaca, Yingtian Chen, Oleg Y. Gnedin
Figure caption: The ratio of surviving model streams to surviving model GCs as a function of Galactocentric radius for the three MW model catalogs (see Appendix A). Note that the differences close to the Galactic center is due to the failed mock streams in the central regions of MW2 and MW3 (see Appendix B).