Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,000

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Halo occupation numbers and galaxy bias

Open access
Peacock, J. A., Smith, R. E.·2000·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We propose a heuristic model that displays the main features of realistic theories for galaxy bias. We show that the low-order clustering statistics of the dark-matter distribution depend almost entirely on the locations and density profiles of dark-matter haloes. A hypothetical galaxy catalogue depends on (i) the efficiency of galaxy formation, as manifested by the halo occupation number -- the number of galaxies brighter than some sample limit contained in a halo of a given mass; (ii) the location of these galaxies within their halo. The first factor is constrained by the empirical luminosity function of groups. For the second factor, we assume that one galaxy marks the halo centre, with any remaining galaxies acting as satellites that trace the halo mass. These simple assumptions amount to a recipe for non-local bias, in which the probability of finding a galaxy is not a simple function of its local mass density. We have applied this prescription to some CDM models of current interest, and find that the predictions are close to the observed galaxy correlations for a flat $Ω=0.3$ model ($Λ$CDM), but not for an $Ω=1$ model with the same power spectrum ($τ$CDM). This is an inevitable consequence of cluster normalization for the power spectra: cluster-scale haloes of given mass have smaller core radii for high $Ω$, and hence display enhanced small-scale clustering. Finally, the pairwise velocity dispersion of galaxies in the $Λ$CDM model is lower than that of the mass, allowing cluster-normalized models to yield a realistic Mach number for the peculiar velocity field. This is largely due to the strong variation of galaxy-formation efficiency with halo mass that is required in this model.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03779.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Peacock, J. A., & Smith, R. E.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2000-11-11
Volume
318
Issue
4
Pages
1144-1156
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2064377583
Cited by
1,000
References
3
FWCI
18.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Halo occupation numbers and galaxy bias. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03779.x
The paper
Peacock, J. A., & Smith, R. E. (2000). Halo occupation numbers and galaxy bias. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03779.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.