Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 488

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Morphology, photometry and kinematics of N-body bars — I. Three models with different halo central concentrations

Open access
Athanassoula, E., Misiriotis, A.·2002·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We discuss the morphology, photometry and kinematics of the bars which have formed in three N-body simulations. These have initially the same disc and the same halo-to-disc mass ratio, but their haloes have very different central concentrations. The third model includes a bulge. The bar in the model with the centrally concentrated halo (model MH) is much stronger, longer and thinner than the bar in the model with the less centrally concentrated halo (model MD). Its shape, when viewed side-on, evolves from boxy to peanut and then to ‘X’-shaped, as opposed to that of model MD, which stays boxy. The projected density profiles obtained from cuts along the bar major axis, for both the face-on and the edge-on views, show a flat part, as opposed to those of model MD which are falling rapidly. A Fourier analysis of the face-on density distribution of model MH shows very large m=2, 4, 6 and 8 components. Contrary to this, for model MD the components m=6 and 8 are negligible. The velocity field of model MH shows strong deviations from axial symmetry, and in particular has wavy isovelocities near the end of the bar when viewed along the bar minor axis. When viewed edge-on, it shows cylindrical rotation, which the MD model does not. The properties of the bar of the model with a bulge and a non-centrally concentrated halo (MDB) are intermediate between those of the bars of the other two models. All three models exhibit a lot of inflow of the disc material during their evolution, so that by the end of the simulations the disc dominates over the halo in the inner parts, even for model MH, for which the halo and disc contributions were initially comparable in that region.

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.1365-8711.2002.05028.x

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 488

Metadata

Authors
Athanassoula, E., & Misiriotis, A.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2002-02
Volume
330
Issue
1
Pages
35-52
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W1995931854
Cited by
488
References
2
FWCI
12.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Morphology, photometry and kinematics of N-body bars — I. Three models with different halo central concentrations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05028.x
The paper
Athanassoula, E., & Misiriotis, A. (2002). Morphology, photometry and kinematics of N-body bars — I. Three models with different halo central concentrations. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05028.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.