Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
earth and planetary sciences
The Aspen-Amsterdam void finder comparison project
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 387, No. 2, Year 2008
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
Despite a history that dates back at least a quarter of a century, studies of voids in the large-scale structure of the Universe are bedevilled by a major problem: there exist a large number of quite different void-finding algorithms, a fact that has so far got in the way of groups comparing their results without worrying about whether such a comparison in fact makes sense. Because of the recent increased interest in voids, both in very large galaxy surveys and in detailed simulations of cosmic structure formation, this situation is very unfortunate. We here present the first systematic comparison study of 13 different void finders constructed using particles, haloes, and semi-analytical model galaxies extracted from a subvolume of the Millennium simulation. This study includes many groups that have studied voids over the past decade. We show their results and discuss their differences and agreements. As it turns out, the basic results of the various methods agree very well with each other in that they all locate a major void near the centre of our volume. Voids have very underdense centres, reaching below 10 per cent of the mean cosmic density. In addition, those void finders that allow for void galaxies show that those galaxies follow similar trends. For example, the overdensity of void galaxies brighter than mB = -20 is found to be smaller than about -0.8 by all our void finding algorithms. © 2008 The Authors.
Authors & Co-Authors
Colberg, Jörg M.
United States, Pittsburgh
Carnegie Mellon University
United States, Amherst
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Pearce, Frazer R.
United Kingdom, Nottingham
University of Nottingham
Foster, Caroline
Canada, Sherbrooke
Bishop's Université
Australia, Hawthorn
Swinburne University of Technology
Platen, Erwin
Netherlands, Groningen
Kapteyn Instituut
Brunino, Riccardo
United Kingdom, Nottingham
University of Nottingham
Neyrinck, Mark
United States, Honolulu
University Hawaii Institute for Astronomy
Basilakos, Spyros
Greece, Athens
Academy of Athens
Fairall, Anthony P.
South Africa, Cape Town
University of Cape Town
Feldman, Hume A.
United States, Lawrence
University of Kansas
Gottlöber, Stefan
Germany, Potsdam
Leibniz Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam
Hahn, Oliver
Switzerland, Zurich
Eth Zürich
Hoyle, Fiona
United States, Chester
Widener University
Müller, Volker
Germany, Potsdam
Leibniz Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam
Nelson, Lorne A.
Canada, Sherbrooke
Bishop's Université
Plionis, Manolis
Greece, Athens
National Observatory of Athens
Mexico, Puebla
Instituto Nacional de Astrofisica Optica y Electronica
Porciani, Cristiano
Switzerland, Zurich
Eth Zürich
Shandarin, Sergei
United States, Lawrence
University of Kansas
Vogeley, Michael S.
United States, Philadelphia
Drexel University
van de Weygaert, Rien
Netherlands, Groningen
Kapteyn Instituut
Statistics
Citations: 169
Authors: 19
Affiliations: 16
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13307.x
ISSN:
00358711
e-ISSN:
13652966
Study Design
Cross Sectional Study