Cited by 402Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaAstrophysics and Star Formation StudiesStellar, planetary, and galactic studies

Evolution of galaxy stellar masses and star formation rates in the eagle simulations

Open access
Furlong, M., Bower, R. G., Theuns, T., Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Schaller, M., Dalla Vecchia, C., Frenk, C. S. +4 more·2015·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We investigate the evolution of galaxy masses and star formation rates in the Evolution and Assembly of Galaxies and their Environment (EAGLE) simulations.These comprise a suite of hydrodynamical simulations in a cold dark matter cosmogony with subgrid models for radiative cooling, star formation, stellar mass-loss and feedback from stars and accreting black holes.The subgrid feedback was calibrated to reproduce the observed present-day galaxy stellar mass function and galaxy sizes.Here, we demonstrate that the simulations reproduce the observed growth of the stellar mass density to within 20 per cent.The simulations also track the observed evolution of the galaxy stellar mass function out to redshift z = 7, with differences comparable to the plausible uncertainties in the interpretation of the data.Just as with observed galaxies, the specific star formation rates of simulated galaxies are bimodal, with distinct star forming and passive sequences.The specific star formation rates of star-forming galaxies are typically 0.2 to 0.5 dex lower than observed, but the evolution of the rates track the observations closely.The unprecedented level of agreement between simulation and data across cosmic time makes EAGLE a powerful resource to understand the physical processes that govern galaxy formation.

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 · 10.1093/mnras/stv852

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The good agreement between halo contraction predictions in three simulation suites reflects that these simulations have galaxy growth histories that match observations.

    “the good agreement between the halo contraction predictions in our three simulations suites reflects the fact that these simulations have galaxy growth histories that match observations (see Furlong et al. 2015, and discussion therein).”

    From The milky way total mass profile as inferred from Gaia DR2 (2020) · cites this paper as Furlong et al. 2015

    Section 5 (Discussion; page not provided) says the EAGLE simulations reproduce observed galaxy stellar-mass growth reasonably well, supporting the growth-history part of the claim. The paper does not establish that three simulation suites match observations or that their growth histories explain agreement in halo-contraction predictions. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The EAGLE model reproduces galaxy rotation curves, the bimodal distribution of star formation rates and cosmic star formation history, the Hubble sequence of galaxy morphologies, and the Tully-Fisher relation over a wide range of galaxy masses.

    “The EAGLE model reproduces galaxy rotation curves (Schaller et al. 2015), the bimodal distribution of star formation rates and the cosmic star formation history (Furlong et al. 2015), the Hubble sequence of galaxy morphologies (Trayford et al. 2015) and the Tully-Fisher relation over a wide range of galaxy masses (Ferrero et al. 2017).”

    From The milky way total mass profile as inferred from Gaia DR2 (2020) · cites this paper as Furlong et al. 2015

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rosas-Guevara Y. M. et al., 2013, preprint (arXiv:1312.0598) · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Furlong, M., Bower, R. G., Theuns, T., Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Schaller, M., Dalla Vecchia, C., Frenk, C. S., McCarthy, I. G., Helly, J., Jenkins, A., & Rosas-Guevara, Y. M.
Affiliations
  • Durham University (GB)
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (GB)
  • École Normale Supérieure de Lyon (FR)
Corresponding author
Furlong, M.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2015-05-22
Volume
450
Issue
4
Pages
4486-4504
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2117644792
Cited by
402
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 15
FWCI
28.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (FP7/2007-2013)
  • European Commission (238356, 278594, 2007–2013, 256573, FP7 2007-2013, FP7/2007)
  • Durham University (ST/K00042X/1, ST/K003267/1, ST/H008519/1)
  • Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe AISBL
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (ST/K00042X/1, FP7 2007-2013, ST/H008519/1)
  • Science and Technology Facilities Council (ST/I000976/1, ST/H008519, ST/I004459/2, ST/K00042X/1, ST/L00061X/1, ST/I00162X/1, ST/L00075X/1, FP7/2007-2013, ST/M007006/1, ST/I004459/1, ST/F001166/1, ST/H008519/1, ST/K003267/1)
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (267291, 321334)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Keywords
galaxy stellar mass function, star formation rate evolution, EAGLE simulation, cold dark matter cosmology, stellar mass density, galaxy formation, fluid simulation, high-redshift galaxies

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