Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 455

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

The optical morphologies of galaxies in the IllustrisTNG simulation: a comparison to Pan-STARRS observations

Open access
Rodriguez-Gomez, Vicente, Snyder, Gregory F, Lotz, Jennifer M, Nelson, Dylan, Pillepich, Annalisa, Springel, Volker, Genel, Shy, Weinberger, Rainer, Tacchella, Sandro, Pakmor, Rüdiger, Torrey, Paul, Marinacci, Federico, Vogelsberger, Mark, Hernquist, Lars, Thilker, David A·2019·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We have generated synthetic images of ∼27 000 galaxies from the IllustrisTNG and the original Illustris hydrodynamic cosmological simulations, designed to match Pan-STARRS observations of log 10 (M * /M ) ≈ 9.8-11.3galaxies at z ≈ 0.05.Most of our synthetic images were created with the SKIRT radiative transfer code, including the effects of dust attenuation and scattering, and performing the radiative transfer directly on the Voronoi mesh used by the simulations themselves.We have analysed both our synthetic and real Pan-STARRS images with the newly developed statmorph code, which calculates non-parametric morphological diagnostics -including the Gini-M 20 and concentration-asymmetry-smoothness statisticsand performs 2D Sérsic fits.Overall, we find that the optical morphologies of IllustrisTNG galaxies are in good agreement with observations, and represent a substantial improvement compared to the original Illustris simulation.In particular, the locus of the Gini-M 20 diagram is consistent with that inferred from observations, while the median trends with stellar mass of all the morphological, size and shape parameters considered in this work lie within the ∼1σ scatter of the observational trends.However, the IllustrisTNG model has some difficulty with more stringent tests, such as producing a strong morphology-colour relation.This results in a somewhat higher fraction of red discs and blue spheroids compared to observations.Similarly, the morphology-size relation is problematic: while observations show that discs tend to be larger than spheroids at a fixed stellar mass, such a trend is not present in IllustrisTNG.

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 · 10.1093/mnras/sty3345

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 455

Metadata

Authors
Rodriguez-Gomez, V., Snyder, G. F., Lotz, J. M., Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Genel, S., Weinberger, R., Tacchella, S., Pakmor, R., Torrey, P., Marinacci, F., Vogelsberger, M., Hernquist, L., & Thilker, D. A.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2018-12-10
Volume
483
Issue
3
Pages
4140-4159
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2892039870
Cited by
455
References
3
FWCI
15.30
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: The optical morphologies of galaxies in the IllustrisTNG simulation: a comparison to Pan-STARRS observations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/mnras/sty3345
The paper
Rodriguez-Gomez, V., Snyder, G. F., Lotz, J. M., Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Genel, S., Weinberger, R., Tacchella, S., Pakmor, R., Torrey, P., Marinacci, F., Vogelsberger, M., Hernquist, L., & Thilker, D. A. (2019). The optical morphologies of galaxies in the IllustrisTNG simulation: a comparison to Pan-STARRS observations. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty3345

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.