pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.22179 · v2 · submitted 2025-09-26 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.CO

The impact of cosmic filaments on the abundance of satellite galaxies

Yuxi Meng , Haonan Zheng , Shihong Liao , Lizhi Xie , Lan Wang , Hongxiang Chen , Liang Gao , Quan Guo
show 4 more authors
Yingjie Jing Jie Wang Hang Yang Guangquan Zeng
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 12:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmic filamentssatellite galaxieshalo massgalaxy environmentIllustrisTNGDisPerSEcosmic webgalaxy abundance
0
0 comments X

The pith

Higher host halo masses explain much of the excess satellite abundance in cosmic filaments

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper uses the IllustrisTNG simulation to compare how many satellite galaxies orbit central galaxies located inside cosmic filaments versus those in the field. Filaments are located with the DisPerSE algorithm, first using galaxies as tracers and then using the dark matter density field. Across magnitude bins, centrals in filaments host more satellites, with average ratios of 3.49, 2.61, and 1.90. The authors show that this excess shrinks sharply once central galaxies are resampled so their host halo mass distributions match between the two environments. The choice of filament tracer also matters: switching to dark-matter-based identification cuts the apparent difference by more than 70 percent, with further reduction after mass matching.

Core claim

Using the IllustrisTNG simulation and DisPerSE filament finder, central galaxies in filaments host on average 3.49, 2.61, and 1.90 times more satellites than field centrals in the magnitude bins around Mr,cen = -22, -21, and -20. Much of this excess satellite abundance arises from the higher masses of host halos in filaments. After resampling centrals in both environments to match the halo mass distributions within each magnitude bin, the filament enhancement is reduced by up to 79 percent. When filaments are instead identified from the dark matter density field, the environmental difference shrinks by more than 70 percent, and further mass resampling suppresses it by an additional 60-95.

What carries the argument

Resampling central galaxies to match halo mass distributions within each magnitude bin isolates the contribution of halo mass from other potential filament effects.

Load-bearing premise

Resampling centrals to match halo mass distributions within magnitude bins fully isolates any residual filament-specific effect independent of mass and that the DisPerSE identification method does not introduce systematic biases in satellite counts.

What would settle it

An observational or simulation sample in which, after precise halo-mass matching within magnitude bins, the satellite abundance still shows a large remaining enhancement in filaments identified with galaxies as tracers would challenge the claim that halo mass accounts for most of the difference.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.22179 by Guangquan Zeng, Hang Yang, Haonan Zheng, Hongxiang Chen, Jie Wang, Lan Wang, Liang Gao, Lizhi Xie, Quan Guo, Shihong Liao, Yingjie Jing, Yuxi Meng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Filaments in a 30 Mpc-thick slice of the TNG100-1 simulation, identified by the DisPerSE algorithm using galaxies with stellar masses Mstar ≥ 109 M⊙ as tracers. The grayscale background shows the dark matter density field. White circles mark the 3×R200c vicinities of galaxy clusters with M200c ≥ 1013.5 M⊙, which are defined as the knot environment. Red dots indicate the centers of galaxies residing in knot… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Environmental dependence of satellite LFs. From left to right, each column shows the results for central galaxies in the bins of Mr,cen ∼ −23 (blue), −22 (red), −21 (green), and −20 (yellow). In the upper panel of each column, solid and dashed lines represent simulated satellite LFs for centrals in filaments and fields, respectively. Shaded regions indicate Poisson errors computed using Eq. (2). Filled squ… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top: Distributions of central galaxy magnitudes (Mr,cen). From left to right, we show the distributions of the original samples, the samples after resampling Mr,cen, and the samples after resampling both Mr,cen and M200c. In each panel, as in other figures in this study, the Mr,cen ∼ −22, −21, and −20 bins are plotted in red, green, and yellow, respectively. Central galaxies in filaments and the field are … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Impact of magnitude and halo mass distributions on the environmental differences in satellite LFs. Left: The upper panel summarizes the satellite LFs for the Mr,cen ∼ −22 (red), −21 (green), and −20 (yellow) bins from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Number ratios between satellite-rich and satellite-poor central galaxies (Nrich/Npoor) as a function of total filament length normalized to the fiducial case (Ltot,test/Ltot,fiducial; a proxy for the persistence ratio threshold). Results from different central galaxy magnitude bins are shown from left to right. Solid lines represent dark matter-traced filaments, while dotted lines correspond to galaxy-trac… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The impact of cosmic web environments on galaxy properties plays a critical role in understanding galaxy formation. Using the state-of-the-art cosmological simulation IllustrisTNG, we investigate how satellite galaxy abundance differs between filaments and the field, with filaments identified using the DisPerSE algorithm. When filaments are identified using galaxies as tracers, we find that, across all magnitude bins, central galaxies in filaments tend to host more satellite galaxies than their counterparts in the field, in qualitative agreement with observational results from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. The average ratios between satellite luminosity functions in filaments and the field are $3.49$, $2.61$, and $1.90$ in the central galaxy $r$-band magnitude bins of $M_{r, {\rm cen}} \sim -22$, $-21$, and $-20$, respectively. We show that much of this excess can be attributed to the higher host halo masses of galaxies in filaments. After resampling central galaxies in both environments to match the halo mass distributions within each magnitude bin, the satellite abundance enhancement in filaments is reduced by up to $79 \%$. Additionally, the choice of tracers used to identify filaments introduces a significant bias: when filaments are identified using the dark matter density field, the environmental difference in satellite abundance is reduced by more than $70 \%$; after further resampling in both magnitude and halo mass, the difference is further suppressed by another $\sim 60$--$95 \%$. Our results highlight the importance of halo mass differences and tracer choice biases when interpreting and understanding the impact of environment on satellite galaxy properties.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper uses the IllustrisTNG simulation to compare satellite galaxy abundance around central galaxies in cosmic filaments versus the field, with filaments identified by DisPerSE using either galaxy or dark matter tracers. It reports higher satellite abundances in filaments, quantified by average filament-to-field ratios of 3.49, 2.61, and 1.90 in the Mr,cen ≈ −22, −21, and −20 bins. The central result is that much of the excess is explained by higher host halo masses in filaments; resampling centrals within each magnitude bin to enforce identical halo-mass distributions reduces the enhancement by up to 79 %. Switching to dark-matter density tracers reduces the raw difference by >70 %, with further suppression (∼60–95 %) after combined magnitude-plus-mass resampling.

Significance. If the resampling and tracer comparisons hold, the work is significant because it supplies a controlled, simulation-based decomposition of an observed environmental signal into mass-driven and residual components. The explicit post-hoc resampling and the independent DM-tracer test directly address the two most plausible confounders, providing a quantitative caution for both observers and theorists interpreting filament effects on satellite populations. The approach is reproducible in principle and yields falsifiable predictions for future surveys once the same mass-matching procedure is applied to observational catalogs.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2] §4.2 (resampling procedure): the claim that halo-mass matching reduces the filament enhancement by up to 79 % is load-bearing for the main conclusion. The text does not specify the halo-mass bin width, the number of resampling draws, or whether satellites are re-counted after each draw; without these details the quoted percentage cannot be independently verified and the residual filament effect cannot be assessed for robustness.
  2. [§3.1] §3.1 (filament identification): the >70 % reduction obtained when filaments are traced by the dark-matter density field rather than galaxies is presented as evidence of tracer bias. It is not stated whether the DisPerSE persistence threshold, smoothing length, or density contrast cut are held fixed or re-tuned for the two tracers; any differential tuning would systematically alter the filament membership and thereby the satellite counts being compared.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract quotes the three ratios without uncertainties or the precise magnitude bin edges; adding these would allow readers to judge the statistical weight of the reported trend.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions (or the figures themselves) should indicate whether shaded regions represent Poisson errors, bootstrap variances, or the spread across the resampling realizations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and positive review, which has identified key areas where additional methodological details will strengthen the reproducibility of our results. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (resampling procedure): the claim that halo-mass matching reduces the filament enhancement by up to 79 % is load-bearing for the main conclusion. The text does not specify the halo-mass bin width, the number of resampling draws, or whether satellites are re-counted after each draw; without these details the quoted percentage cannot be independently verified and the residual filament effect cannot be assessed for robustness.

    Authors: We agree that these procedural details are necessary for independent verification and for evaluating the robustness of the residual enhancement. In the revised manuscript we will specify the halo-mass bin width employed, the number of resampling draws performed, and confirm that satellite abundances are re-counted after each draw, with the reported reduction representing the mean over the ensemble of realizations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.1] §3.1 (filament identification): the >70 % reduction obtained when filaments are traced by the dark-matter density field rather than galaxies is presented as evidence of tracer bias. It is not stated whether the DisPerSE persistence threshold, smoothing length, or density contrast cut are held fixed or re-tuned for the two tracers; any differential tuning would systematically alter the filament membership and thereby the satellite counts being compared.

    Authors: We confirm that the DisPerSE parameters were held fixed between the galaxy-tracer and dark-matter-tracer runs to ensure a controlled comparison of tracer choice. We will revise §3.1 to state this explicitly and to report the specific values of the persistence threshold, smoothing length, and density contrast cut that were used for both tracers. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper's central results derive from direct counts of satellite galaxies in the IllustrisTNG simulation, with filaments identified via DisPerSE on galaxy or dark-matter tracers. The reported reduction in excess abundance after resampling centrals to enforce identical halo-mass distributions within magnitude bins is a standard statistical control procedure, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. No equations reduce outputs to inputs by construction, no load-bearing claims rest on self-citations, and the analysis remains externally falsifiable against the simulation data itself.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the accuracy of the IllustrisTNG galaxy formation model and the assumption that DisPerSE filament finding captures the relevant cosmic web structures without major selection effects.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption IllustrisTNG accurately reproduces the abundance and spatial distribution of satellite galaxies in different large-scale environments.
    All quantitative conclusions rest on the fidelity of this particular simulation suite.
  • ad hoc to paper Resampling centrals to match halo mass distributions removes all mass-driven contributions to the satellite excess.
    This step is central to attributing the remaining difference (or lack thereof) to filament environment.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5845 in / 1402 out tokens · 37673 ms · 2026-05-18T12:48:32.572043+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15076.x

    Angulo, R. E., Lacey, C. G., Baugh, C. M., & Frenk, C. S. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 983, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15333.x Arag´ on-Calvo, M. A., van de Weygaert, R., Jones, B. J. T., & van der Hulst, J. M. 2007, ApJL, 655, L5, doi: 10.1086/511633 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201...

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15333.x 2009

  2. [2]

    M., & Jablonka, P

    Bahe, Y. M., & Jablonka, P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.06484, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2502.06484

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.06484 2025

  3. [3]

    and Eisenstein, Daniel and Hogg, David W

    Blanton, M. R., Eisenstein, D., Hogg, D. W., Schlegel, D. J., & Brinkmann, J. 2005, ApJ, 629, 143, doi: 10.1086/422897

    work page doi:10.1086/422897 2005

  4. [4]

    How Filaments are Woven into the Cosmic Web

    Bond, J. R., Kofman, L., & Pogosyan, D. 1996, Nature, 380, 603, doi: 10.1038/380603a0

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1038/380603a0 1996

  5. [5]

    , keywords =

    Jenkins, A. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 896, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16774.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16774.x 2010

  6. [6]

    , keywords =

    Bullock, J. S., & Boylan-Kolchin, M. 2017, ARA&A, 55, 343, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055313

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-091916-055313 2017

  7. [7]

    2022, A&A, 657, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040141

    Castignani, G., Combes, F., Jablonka, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 657, A9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040141

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202040141 2022

  8. [8]

    Cautun, M., van de Weygaert, R., Jones, B. J. T., & Frenk, C. S. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 2923, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu768 15

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu768 2014

  9. [9]

    Chandrasekhar, Astrophysical Journal97(1943), 10.1086/144517

    Chandrasekhar, S. 1943, ApJ, 97, 255, doi: 10.1086/144517

    work page doi:10.1086/144517 1943

  10. [10]

    E., et al

    Codis, S., Jindal, A., Chisari, N. E., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 4753, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2567

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2567 2018

  11. [11]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15076.x

    Crain, R. A., Theuns, T., Dalla Vecchia, C., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 1773, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15402.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15402.x 2009

  12. [12]

    Christopher and Sobral, David and Scoville, Nick and Stroe, Andra and Hemmati, Shoubaneh and Kartaltepe, Jeyhan , number =

    Darvish, B., Mobasher, B., Martin, D. C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 837, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/837/1/16

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/837/1/16 2017

  13. [13]

    , keywords =

    Davis, M., Efstathiou, G., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1985, ApJ, 292, 371, doi: 10.1086/163168

    work page doi:10.1086/163168 1985

  14. [14]

    2007, title Formation and Evolution of Galaxy Dark Matter Halos and Their Substructure , , 667, 859, 10.1086/520573

    Diemand, J., Kuhlen, M., & Madau, P. 2007, ApJ, 667, 859, doi: 10.1086/520573

    work page doi:10.1086/520573 2007

  15. [15]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15076.x

    Dolag, K., Borgani, S., Murante, G., & Springel, V. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 497, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15034.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15034.x 2009

  16. [16]

    Dancing in the dark: galactic properties trace spin swings along the cosmic web

    Dubois, Y., Pichon, C., Welker, C., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 1453, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1227

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1227 2014

  17. [17]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15076.x

    Fakhouri, O., & Ma, C.-P. 2009, MNRAS, 394, 1825, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14480.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14480.x 2009

  18. [18]

    S., & White, S

    Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 2012, Annalen der Physik, 524, 507, doi: 10.1002/andp.201200212 Gal´ arraga-Espinosa, D., Cadiou, C., Gouin, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A63, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347982 Ganeshaiah Veena, P., Cautun, M., Tempel, E., van de

    work page doi:10.1002/andp.201200212 2012

  19. [19]

    Weygaert, R., & Frenk, C. S. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1607, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1343

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1343 2019

  20. [20]

    , keywords =

    Gao, L., Frenk, C. S., Boylan-Kolchin, M., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 2309, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17601.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17601.x 2011

  21. [21]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07876.x

    Springel, V. 2004, MNRAS, 355, 819, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08360.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08360.x 2004

  22. [22]

    Guo, Q., Tempel, E., & Libeskind, N. I. 2015, ApJ, 800, 112, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/112

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/800/2/112 2015

  23. [23]

    T., & Kozasa, T.\ 2008, , 384, 1725

    Hahn, O., Carollo, C. M., Porciani, C., & Dekel, A. 2007a, MNRAS, 381, 41, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12249.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12249.x 2007

  24. [24]

    , keywords =

    Hahn, O., Porciani, C., Carollo, C. M., & Dekel, A. 2007b, MNRAS, 375, 489, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11318.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11318.x 2006

  25. [25]

    R.et al.Array programming with NumPy.Nature585, 357–362, 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 (2020)

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  26. [26]

    E., et al

    Hoosain, M., Blyth, S.-L., Skelton, R. E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 4139, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae174

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae174 2024

  27. [27]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    work page doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  28. [28]

    Jiang, F., & van den Bosch, F. C. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 657, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1979

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1979 2017

  29. [29]

    Kauffmann, G., White, S. D. M., Heckman, T. M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 353, 713, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08117.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08117.x 2004

  30. [30]

    A., Trujillo-Gomez, S., & Primack, J

    Klypin, A. A., Trujillo-Gomez, S., & Primack, J. 2011, ApJ, 740, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/740/2/102

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/740/2/102 2011

  31. [31]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 5437, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3055

    Laigle, C., Pichon, C., Arnouts, S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 5437, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3055

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3055 2018

  32. [32]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, 464, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz441

    Liao, S., & Gao, L. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 464, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz441

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz441 2019

  33. [33]

    , keywords =

    Libeskind, N. I., Hoffman, Y., Knebe, A., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 421, L137, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01222.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2012.01222.x 2012

  34. [34]

    I., van de Weygaert, R., Cautun, M., et al

    Libeskind, N. I., van de Weygaert, R., Cautun, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 1195, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1976

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1976 2018

  35. [35]

    2025, ApJ, 984, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc44b

    Liu, Y., Gao, L., Liao, S., & Zhu, K. 2025, ApJ, 984, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc44b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc44b 2025

  36. [36]

    2020a, A&A, 642, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037647

    Bonjean, V. 2020a, A&A, 642, A19, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202037647

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202037647

  37. [37]

    2020b, A&A, 634, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936629

    Douspis, M. 2020b, A&A, 634, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936629

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936629

  38. [38]

    First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: radio haloes and magnetic fields

    Marinacci, F., Vogelsberger, M., Pakmor, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 5113, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2206 Markos Hunde, F., Newton, O., Hellwing, W. A., Bilicki, M., & Naidoo, K. 2025, A&A, 700, A65, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452246

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2206 2018

  39. [39]

    2015, MNRAS, 446, 1458, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2166

    Theuns, T. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 1458, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2166

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2166 2015

  40. [40]

    C., & White, S

    Mo, H., van den Bosch, F. C., & White, S. 2010, Galaxy Formation and Evolution (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press)

    work page 2010

  41. [41]

    First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: A tale of two elements -- chemical evolution of magnesium and europium

    Naiman, J. P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 1206, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty618

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty618 2018

  42. [42]

    First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: the galaxy color bimodality

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 624, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3040

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3040 2018

  43. [43]

    Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology , keywords =

    Nelson, D., Springel, V., Pillepich, A., et al. 2019, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 6, 2, doi: 10.1186/s40668-019-0028-x

    work page doi:10.1186/s40668-019-0028-x 2019

  44. [44]

    First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: the stellar mass content of groups and clusters of galaxies

    Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., Hernquist, L., et al. 2018a, MNRAS, 475, 648, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3112

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3112

  45. [45]

    Simulating Galaxy Formation with the IllustrisTNG Model

    Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Nelson, D., et al. 2018b, MNRAS, 473, 4077, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2656 Planck Collaboration, Ade, P. A. R., Aghanim, N., et al. 2016, A&A, 594, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 Rodr´ ıguez-Puebla, A., Behroozi, P., Primack, J., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 462, 893, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1705

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2656 2016

  46. [46]

    2025, ApJL, 983, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc130

    Rong, Y., Wang, P., & Tang, X.-x. 2025, ApJL, 983, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc130

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc130 2025

  47. [47]

    Rost, A., Stasyszyn, F., Pereyra, L., & Mart´ ınez, H. J. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 1936, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa320

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa320 2020

  48. [48]

    Nature Astronomy , keywords =

    Sales, L. V., Wetzel, A., & Fattahi, A. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 897, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w 16

    work page doi:10.1038/s41550-022-01689-w 2022

  49. [49]

    , author Padovani, P

    Sousbie, T. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 350, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18394.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18394.x 2011

  50. [50]

    , author Padovani, P

    Sousbie, T., Pichon, C., & Kawahara, H. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 384, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18395.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18395.x 2011

  51. [51]

    doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15076.x

    Springel, V. 2010, MNRAS, 401, 791, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15715.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15715.x 2010

  52. [52]

    Springel, V., White, S. D. M., Tormen, G., & Kauffmann, G. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 726, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04912.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04912.x 2001

  53. [53]

    V., & Aharonian, F

    Springel, V., Wang, J., Vogelsberger, M., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 391, 1685, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14066.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.14066.x 2008

  54. [54]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Springel, V., Pakmor, R., Pillepich, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 676, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3304

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3304 2018

  55. [55]

    2025, MNRAS, 539, 487, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf523

    Storck, A., Cadiou, C., Agertz, O., & Gal´ arraga-Espinosa, D. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 487, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf523

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf523 2025

  56. [56]

    S., Mart \' nez , V

    Tempel, E., Stoica, R. S., Mart´ ınez, V. J., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 438, 3465, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2454

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt2454 2014

  57. [57]

    2020 , note =

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  58. [58]

    Wang, P., Guo, Q., Kang, X., & Libeskind, N. I. 2018, ApJ, 866, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aae20f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aae20f 2018

  59. [59]

    2024, MNRAS, 532, 4604, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1801

    Wang, W., Wang, P., Guo, H., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 4604, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1801

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1801 2024

  60. [60]

    2020, MNRAS, 498, 1839, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2497

    Xu, W., Guo, Q., Zheng, H., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 1839, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2497

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2497 2020

  61. [61]

    2025, ApJ, 989, 187, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adeca3

    Yang, Q.-R., Zhu, W., Yu, G.-Y., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 187, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adeca3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adeca3 2025

  62. [62]

    2025, ApJ, 986, 193, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc80f

    Yu, G., Zhu, W., Yang, Q.-R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 986, 193, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adc80f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc80f 2025

  63. [63]

    2023, MNRAS, 525, 4079, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2562

    Zakharova, D., Vulcani, B., De Lucia, G., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 4079, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2562

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2562 2023

  64. [64]

    2024, A&A, 690, A300, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450825

    Zakharova, D., Vulcani, B., De Lucia, G., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A300, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450825

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450825 2024

  65. [65]

    Zavala, J., & Frenk, C. S. 2019, Galaxies, 7, 81, doi: 10.3390/galaxies7040081

    work page doi:10.3390/galaxies7040081 2019

  66. [66]

    2025, MNRAS, 539, 1692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf611

    Zhang, Y., Yang, X., Guo, H., Wang, P., & Shi, F. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 1692, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf611

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf611 2025

  67. [67]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 2488, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1476

    Zheng, H., Liao, S., Hu, J., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 2488, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1476

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1476 2022

  68. [68]

    2022, ApJ, 924, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac37b9

    Zhu, W., Zhang, F., & Feng, L.-L. 2022, ApJ, 924, 132, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac37b9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac37b9 2022