adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Simulating Propagation of a Coronal Mass Ejection from Solar Corona to 1 au with the Alfvén Wave Solar Atmosphere Model and Fitting of Gibson–Low
Authors: Xinghua Dai
Figure caption: Simulation (red lines) and in situ measurements from STA (black lines) of plasma velocity (left column) and magnetic field (right column) of the ICME. Top row: total values. Second row: radial components. Third row: tangent components. Bottom row: normal components.
Paper: Simulating Propagation of a Coronal Mass Ejection from Solar Corona to 1 au with the Alfvén Wave Solar Atmosphere Model and Fitting of Gibson–Low
Authors: Xinghua Dai
Figure caption: Magnetic lines of the GL model on planes of ﹩y^{\prime} {z}^{{\prime} }﹩ (left panel) and ﹩y^{\prime} {x}^{{\prime} }﹩ (right panel).
Paper: Simulating Propagation of a Coronal Mass Ejection from Solar Corona to 1 au with the Alfvén Wave Solar Atmosphere Model and Fitting of Gibson–Low
Authors: Xinghua Dai
Figure caption: CME propagation in the SC (top row) and IH (bottom row) component.
Paper: Simulating Propagation of a Coronal Mass Ejection from Solar Corona to 1 au with the Alfvén Wave Solar Atmosphere Model and Fitting of Gibson–Low
Authors: Xinghua Dai
Figure caption: In situ measurements from STA (black lines) and simulations of plasma velocity (top row), proton density (second row), proton temperature (third row), and magnetic field (bottom row). Simulation with unchanged parameters are presented with red lines. Left column: value of a1 is modified to a1 × 0.5 (green lines) or a1 × 1.5 (blue lines). Right column: sign of helicity is changed to be negative (green lines) or symmetry axis is rotated with 90° (blue lines).
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: MOF of luminosity-selected AGNs in TNG300-1 at redshift, z = 0.1 (left) and z = 1 (right). The dots (crosses) represent central (satellite) AGN. The error bars on the data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. Samples with luminosity cuts Lbol > 1042 erg s−1, 1043 erg s−1, and 1044 erg s−1 are represented in blue, green, and red, respectively. The notable departure from the step function (in Figure 1) is evident in the halo mass scales above 1012M⊙. The envelopes show the best fit 〈Nsat〉 with 3σ errors. The best-fit parameters are shown in Figure 4.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: MOF of mass-selected SMBH in TNG300-1 at redshift, z = 0.1 (left) and z = 1 (right). The dots (crosses) represent central (satellite) SMBH. The error bars on the data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. Samples with mass cuts MBH > 106 M⊙, 107 M⊙, and 108 M⊙ are represented in blue, green, and red, respectively. The occupation function is well described by a five-parameter model as found in previous studies (C. Degraf et al. 2011; S. Chatterjee et al. 2012). The envelopes show the best-fit models with 3σ errors.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: (a) Comparison between the MOF of AGN in TNG100-1 (blue) and TNG300-1 (green) at redshifts z = 0.1 (left) and z = 1 (right). Dots and crosses represent centrals and satellites, respectively. Top: Mass-selected SMBH with MBH > 107 M⊙. Bottom: Luminosity-selected AGN with Lbol > 1044 erg s−1. The error bars on data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. While both in the SMBH and AGN population the central occupation functions match, there are significant differences in the satellite population. (b) AGN(Lbol ≥ 1042 erg s−1) luminosity vs. host halo mass (20% of the data points are randomly plotted for visualization purpose). The blue, orange, green, and red points are for TNG300-1, TNG100-1, TNG100-2, and SIMBAflagship, respectively, at z = 1. The solid lines represent the average AGN luminosity at a given halo mass. (c) Ratio of MOF of satellite SMBH in simulations with same resolution but different box sizes. Left: Ratio of MOF between TNG300-1 and TNG100-2. Right: Ratio of MOF between TNG300-2 and TNG100-3. (d): Ratio of the number of satellite SMBHs as a function of halo mass, comparing simulations with varying resolutions. IllustrisTNG simulations with a 100 Mpc box size and IllustrisTNG simulations with a 300 Mpc box size.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Left: Redshift evolution of the MOF of mass-selected SMBHs with MBH > 107 M⊙ in TNG300-1. The dots (crosses) represent the central (satellite) SMBH. The error bars of data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. MOF at z = 0.1, 1, 2, 3 are shown in blue, red, green, and purple, respectively. Right: Redshift evolution of the MOF of luminosity-selected AGN with Lbol > 1044 erg s−1 in TNG300-1. The dots (crosses) represent the central (satellite) AGN. The error bars of data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. MOF at z = 0.1,1,2,3 are shown in blue, red, green, purple, respectively. The decrease in AGN fraction at a characteristic mass scale of 1013M⊙ is evident at all redshifts, although the effect is much stronger at lower redshifts. The envelopes show the best fit with 3σ errors.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Evolution of the best-fit parameters of Equation (5) as a function of redshift(z). Parameters for three different luminosity cuts of AGNs, Lbol > 1042 erg s−1, 1043 erg s−1, and 1044 erg s−1 are represented in blue, orange, and, green respectively. Top: Variation of M1 with z. Middle: Variation of α with z. Bottom: Variation of Mcut with z.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Left: MOF of central (top) and satellite (bottom) SMBH, with a mass cut of MBH > 107 M⊙ in different SIMBA simulation runs at z = 0.1. Right: MOF of central (top) and satellite (bottom) AGN, with a luminosity cut of Lbol > 1042 erg s−1 in different SIMBA simulation runs at z = 0.1. While the different feedback modes have almost no effect on the occupation function of black holes, it significantly affects the occupation function of central AGN in halos. The departure from the step-function is evident when the jet mode of feedback (green and the blue triangles in the top right panel) is introduced in SIMBA.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Left: Redshift evolution of the MOF of Quenched Galaxies with log sSFR(yr−1) < −11 in TNG300-1. The dots (crosses) represent the central (satellite) SMBH. The error bars of data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. MOF at z = 0.1, 1, 2, 3 are shown in blue, red, green, and purple respectively. Right: Redshift evolution of the MOF of Star-forming Galaxies with log sSFR(yr−1) ≥ −11 in TNG300-1. The dots (crosses) represent the central (satellite) AGN. The error bars of data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. MOF at z = 0.1,1,2,3 are shown in blue, red, green, purple respectively. The decrease in fraction of star-forming galaxies, similar to AGN fraction, at a characteristic mass scale of 1013M⊙ is evident at all redshifts although the effect is much stronger at lower redshifts.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Global satellite fraction of luminosity-selected AGNs (Quasars: Lbol > 1045 erg s−1) and mass-selected SMBHs (SMBHs: Mbh > 106M⊙) as a function of redshift in TNG300-1. The satellite fraction of our quasar sample increases as we go to lower redshifts, while it saturates below z = 1.0 for the SMBH sample. Our findings support the results of S. Alam et al. (2021), who show using clustering studies that 20%–40% of QSO in the intermediate redshift ranges are satellites. See Section 4 for discussions.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Top: Comparison between MOF of mass-selected SMBH in TNG300-1 and SIMBA at redshifts z = 0.1 (left) and z = 1 (right). Dots (crosses) represent central (satellite) SMBH with a mass cut of MBH >  107 M⊙. Bottom: Comparison between MOF of luminosity-selected AGNs in TNG300-1 and SIMBA at redshifts z = 0.1 (left) and z = 1 (right). Dots (crosses) represent central (satellite) AGN with a luminosity cut of Lbol > 1042 erg s−1. The error bars on data points are 1σ Poisson error bars. AGNs in TNG300-1 and SIMBA are represented in blue and red respectively.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Normalized number distributions of satellite AGNs (Lbol > 1044erg s−1) in host halo mass bins. The blue bar plots show the actual distribution of AGNs in halos (normalized to the maximum number), and the red dashed histograms depict the theoretical Poisson distribution with the sample mean in the particular mass bin. The number zero represents the number of halos in the mass bin that do not host any AGN (Lbol > 1044erg s−1). The number distribution is close to a Poisson distribution, justifying the Poisson error bars. The departure from Poisson is mostly sub-Poissonian in nature.
Paper: Halo Occupation Distribution of Quasars: Dependence on Luminosity, Redshift, Black Hole Mass and Feedback Modes
Authors: Anirban Chowdhary, Suchetana Chatterjee
Figure caption: Left: Black dots (crosses) represent the directly measured MOF of centrals (satellites) from the IllustrisTNG simulation (TNG300-1). Colored solid (dashed) lines show the median reconstructed MOF from the HOD fit described in Section 3.4, with shaded regions indicating the 16th and 84th percentiles. Right: Black dots show the measured ξ(r) from TNG300-1, while colored lines represent the best-fit model predictions using the five-parameter HOD. The lower panels display the ratio between the model and the simulation data.
Paper: Diffusion of Relativistic Charged Particles and Field Lines in Isotropic Turbulence. II. Analytical Models
Authors: Marco Kuhlen, Philipp Mertsch, Vo Hong Minh Phan
Figure caption: Asymptotic parallel and perpendicular mean free paths λ∥ and λ⊥ as a function of reduced rigidity rg/Lc for different turbulence levels η. The dots and squares are the results from test particle simulations. The dotted–dashed and solid lines show the predictions from our model that includes a subdiffusive phase in the running field line diffusion coefficient dFL. The perpendicular mean free path without a subdiffusive phase in dFL is indicated by the dotted lines.
Paper: Diffusion of Relativistic Charged Particles and Field Lines in Isotropic Turbulence. II. Analytical Models
Authors: Marco Kuhlen, Philipp Mertsch, Vo Hong Minh Phan
Figure caption: Ratio λ⊥/λ∥ of the perpendicular and parallel mean free paths as a function of reduced rigidity rg/Lc for different turbulence levels η. The dots show the results of test particle simulations. Our model predictions including a subdiffusive phase in the running field line diffusion coefficient dFL are shown by the solid lines. The model predictions without a subdiffusive phase in dFL are indicated by the dotted lines.
Paper: Diffusion of Relativistic Charged Particles and Field Lines in Isotropic Turbulence. II. Analytical Models
Authors: Marco Kuhlen, Philipp Mertsch, Vo Hong Minh Phan
Figure caption: Running field line diffusion coefficients dFL for the different turbulence levels η. The solid lines show the running field line diffusion coefficient dFL (Equation (24)), including a subdiffusive phase with parameters fitted to the asymptotic perpendicular mean free path λ⊥. For the dotted line, we have set γ = 0 in Equation (24), and thus there is no subdiffusive phase. The gray dashed line and shaded band indicate the results of simulations for field line transport at the respective turbulence level η.
Paper: Diffusion of Relativistic Charged Particles and Field Lines in Isotropic Turbulence. II. Analytical Models
Authors: Marco Kuhlen, Philipp Mertsch, Vo Hong Minh Phan
Figure caption: Running parallel and perpendicular diffusion coefficients d∥ and d⊥ for different reduced rigidities rg/Lc. The gray lines and bands indicate the means and standard mean errors from the test particle simulations. The dashed (solid) line shows the running parallel (perpendicular) diffusion coefficient from the simulations. The asymptotic values are indicated by the dashed and dotted–dashed lines, respectively. Finally, the dotted gray line indicates ﹩{L}_{\,{\rm{c}}\,}^{2}/t﹩, i.e., the asymptotic perpendicular diffusion coefficient κ⊥ is attained once the running perpendicular diffusion coefficient d⊥ intersects this line.
Paper: Diffusion of Relativistic Charged Particles and Field Lines in Isotropic Turbulence. II. Analytical Models
Authors: Marco Kuhlen, Philipp Mertsch, Vo Hong Minh Phan
Figure caption: Running field line diffusion coefficient dFL. For turbulence levels of η = 0.2 and 0.5, we compare the result of the numerically integration of Equations (18) and (19) with the results of the numerical simulations (M. Kuhlen et al. 2025).
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Heating and cooling rates. Left panel: The red curves represent the tidal heating rate, H(e, d), at selected values of e, setting Qice = 25. The orange dotted curves (Hfull) are for a more general heating model that does not assume that the shell is very rigid. But since Hfull leads to little change over the range of ds of interest, we use H in this paper for simplicity. The green horizontal dashed line is the heating rate for equilibrium pushing (Equation (18), at our fiducial value of τ = 10 Gyr). And blue is the cooling due to conduction through the shell (Equation (30)). Right panel: Equilibrium curves in the e–d plane, produced by equating rates in the left panel. The red curve represents equilibrium of the MMR, and the blue curve is where the ice shell thickness does not change. The circle is the global (unstable) equilibrium point.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Numerical evolution in the e–d plane. Left panel: The black curve displays the system’s evolution, after it is initialized at the global equilibrium point. It escapes from equilibrium, and then traces out repeating limit cycles. Right panel: The black curve is the same as in the left panel, but restricted to the limit cycle. The black circles on the curve are separated by 1 Myr, over the course of one cycle. The blue and red curves are the equilibrium heating and cooling curves, repeated from Figure 2, with the blue showing H = C and the red showing H = Heq.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Evolution of Δ, Δ2, and e2, where we have subtracted the constant Δeq = 0.02 from the Δs. Left panel: Initial evolution. Right panel: Evolution in the limit cycle. The vertical line marked “today” shows when e = eobs = 0.0047.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Left panel: heating and cooling rates. Right panel: integrated heating rate.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Evolution of d and e over two limit cycles.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Cartoon view of the limit cycle. The axes are Enceladus’s orbital eccentricity (e), and the thickness of its ice shell (d).
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Libration amplitude.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Limit cycle for different parameters. In each of the three panels, we vary one parameter while keeping the other parameters at their fiducial values. Each inset shows the value of the respective parameter that is varied, as well as the period of the limit cycle for that parameter value.
Paper: Enceladus’s Limit Cycle
Authors: Peter Goldreich, Yoram Lithwick, Jing Luan
Figure caption: Evolution from realistic initial conditions. Left panel: d vs. e. Right panel: Δ’s vs. time. For this figure, we used our default values for the parameters τ, Qice, and Δeq.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: Satellite distribution ﹩P(\cos \theta )﹩ for halo pairs of different pair separations (panels from left to right) and primary halo masses (panels from top to bottom), as indicated. In each panel, different symbols/lines/colors represent the results of different samples, including the actual halo pairs (black circles), the overlap sample without alignment (green), and the aligned overlap samples with a misalignment angle of zero (magenta) or 30° (cyan). The P and Q parameters quantifying the bulging and lopsidedness in the satellite distribution are indicated in each panel, with the colors corresponding to the different samples.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: A schematic of a typical halo pair is illustrated, where the more massive halo (primary, depicted in blue) and the less massive halo (secondary, depicted in red) are separated by a distance of dsep. Subhalos located within a radius of 0.5dsep from the two halos are considered “satellites,” represented by red and blue ellipticals enclosed by thin-dashed circles. For a given satellite at a distance of dsat from its host halo, the position angle θ is defined as the angle between the line connecting the satellite to its halo and the line connecting the paired halos. The large-dashed circle, which is centered at the midpoint of the pair connection line and has a radius of dsep, represents the exclusion boundary, within which there must be no third halo that is more massive than half of the primary halo mass. See the text for further details.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: The satellite distributions P(Θ) obtained in 2D and from the mock catalog are shown in red-shaded regions and blue dots, for halo pairs of different separations and primary halo masses, as indicated. For comparison, the 3D measurement ﹩P(\cos \theta )﹩ and the 2D measurement of the halo pairs selected in 3D are plotted as gray-shaded regions and green dots, respectively.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: Satellite distribution ﹩P(\cos \theta )﹩ for halo pairs of different pair separations and secondary-to-primary halo mass ratios, as indicated. The symbols and colors are the same as in Figure 4.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: Satellite distribution ﹩P(\cos \theta )﹩ for halo pairs of different primary halo masses and satellite-to-host distances, as indicated. The symbols and colors are the same as in Figure 4.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: Satellite distribution in 3D as measured by ﹩P(\cos \theta )﹩ for halo pairs of varying separation dsep, primary halo mass Mp, and secondary-to-primary halo mass ratio Ms/Mp, as indicated. The horizontal line indicates the uniform distribution. The numbers listed at the bottom are the sample size of the corresponding subsamples.
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: Satellite distribution ﹩P(\cos \theta )﹩ for halo pairs of different primary halo masses, as well as different satellite-to-host distances for a given halo mass, as indicated. Those two subsamples have the same number of pairs, as listed at the bottom.
Paper: Observing Supernova Neutrino Light Curves with Super-Kamiokande. VI. A Practical Data Analysis Technique Considering Realistic Experimental Backgrounds
Authors: Fumi Nakanishi, Ken'ichiro Nakazato, Masayuki Harada, Yusuke Koshio, Ryuichiro Akaho, Yosuke Ashida, Akira Harada, Masamitsu Mori, Kohsuke Sumiyoshi, Yudai Suwa, Roger A. Wendell, Masamichi Zaizen
Figure caption: Luminosity (upper) and average energy (lower) of ﹩{\bar{\nu }}_{e}﹩ emitted during PNS cooling as a function of time after the bounce. The left panel is for PNS models with a baryon mass of Mb = 1.62M⊙, where thin and thick lines correspond to models with MZAMS = 15M⊙ and 40M⊙, respectively, and solid (black), dashed (green), dotted-dashed (red), and dotted (blue) lines correspond to models with the Shen EOS, the Togashi EOS, the LS220 EOS, and the Furusawa–Togashi EOS, respectively. The right panel is for models with the Furusawa–Togashi EOS, where the lines correspond, from bottom to top, to (Mb, MZAMS) = (1.40M⊙, 15M⊙), (1.47M⊙, 15M⊙), (1.54M⊙, 15M⊙), (1.62M⊙, 15M⊙), (1.62M⊙, 40M⊙), (1.70M⊙, 40M⊙), (1.78M⊙, 40M⊙), (1.86M⊙, 40M⊙).
Paper: Lopsided and Bulging Distribution of Satellites around Paired Halos. II. 3D Analysis and Dependence on Projection and Selection Effects
Authors: Qinglin Ma, Cheng Li, Yanhan Guo
Figure caption: Measurements of satellite distribution are compared for actual halos in 3D (red), overlapping halos in 3D (gray), actual pairs in the mock catalog (blue), and overlapping halos in the mock catalog (green). Panels from left to right are for different pair separations, and those from top to bottom are for different primary halo masses, as indicated.
Paper: Observing Supernova Neutrino Light Curves with Super-Kamiokande. VI. A Practical Data Analysis Technique Considering Realistic Experimental Backgrounds
Authors: Fumi Nakanishi, Ken'ichiro Nakazato, Masayuki Harada, Yusuke Koshio, Ryuichiro Akaho, Yosuke Ashida, Akira Harada, Masamitsu Mori, Kohsuke Sumiyoshi, Yudai Suwa, Roger A. Wendell, Masamichi Zaizen
Figure caption:  ﹩{T}_{{\rm{last}}}^{{\rm{true}}}﹩ distribution for PNS models with a baryon mass of Mb = 1.40M⊙, represented as follows: black for the Shen EOS, red for the LS220 EOS, blue for the Furusawa–Togashi EOS, and green for the Togashi EOS case. This plot is made from 1000 MC realizations; the vertical axis shows the number of MC realizations per second. We assume observations from supernova at a distance of 10 kpc.