REVIEW 2 cited by
Mergers and Bulge Formation in Lambda-CDM: Which Mergers Matter?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Mergers and Bulge Formation in Lambda-CDM: Which Mergers Matter?
read the original abstract
We use a suite of semi-empirical models to predict galaxy merger rates and contributions to bulge growth as functions of merger mass, redshift, and mass ratio. The models use empirical halo occupation constraints to identify mergers, together with high-resolution simulations to quantify how mergers with different properties contribute to the bulge population. We find good agreement with a variety of observational constraints, and provide fitting functions for merger rates and contributions to bulge growth. We identify several robust conclusions. (1) Major mergers dominate formation and assembly of L* bulges and the spheroid mass density, minor mergers contribute ~30%. (2) This is mass-dependent: bulge formation is dominated by more minor mergers in lower-mass systems. At higher masses, bulges form in major mergers near L*, but subsequently assemble in minor mergers. (3) The minor/major contribution is also morphology-dependent: higher B/T systems form in more major mergers, lower B/T systems form in situ from minor mergers. (4) Low-mass galaxies, being gas-rich, require more major mergers to reach the same B/T as high-mass systems. (5) Absolute merger rates increase with galaxy mass. (6) Predicted rates agree well with observations, but suggest that some morphology-selected samples include contamination from minor mergers. (7) Predicted rates agree with integrated growth in bulge mass with cosmic time, but with factor ~2 uncertainty - half the bulge mass density could come from non-mergers. We consider ~1000 model variations and quantify resulting uncertainties. Conclusions regarding the major/minor contribution to bulge growth are very robust, absolute merger rates have systematic factor ~2 uncertainties.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Morphology-spin connection in the SAMI Galaxy Survey
Bulge prominence and ellipticity are the strongest photometric predictors of galaxy spin, with age and mass secondary in SAMI data.
-
Comparison and verification methods to trace interaction-driven disturbances in galaxies
SSL model detects galaxy interaction signatures with recall 0.86 and low contamination while CAS at A>0.35 has recall 0.20 but higher precision, benchmarked on visual classification of 25.1% disturbed fraction.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.