Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 184

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

Halo stochasticity from exclusion and nonlinear clustering

Open access
Baldauf, Tobias, Seljak, Uroš, Smith, Robert E., Hamaus, Nico, Desjacques, Vincent·2013·Physical Review D

Abstract

The clustering of galaxies in ongoing and upcoming galaxy surveys contains a wealth of cosmological information, but extracting this information is a nontrivial task since galaxies and their host haloes are stochastic tracers of the nonlinear matter density field. This stochasticity is usually modeled as the Poisson shot noise, which is constant as a function of wave number with amplitude given by $1/\overline{n}$, where $\overline{n}$ is the number density of galaxies. Here we use dark matter haloes in $N$-body simulations to show evidence for deviations from this simple behavior and develop models that explain the behavior of the stochasticity on large scales. First, haloes are extended, nonoverlapping objects, i.e., their correlation function needs to go to $\ensuremath{-}1$ on small scales. This leads to a negative correction to the stochasticity relative to the Poisson value at low wave number $k$, decreasing to zero for wave numbers large compared to the inverse exclusion scale. Second, haloes show a nonlinear enhancement of clustering outside the exclusion scale, leading to a positive stochasticity correction. Both of these effects go to zero for high $k$, making the stochasticity scale dependent even for $k<0.1h\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{Mpc}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$. We show that the corrections in the low-$k$ regime are the same in Eulerian and Lagrangian space, but that the transition scale is pushed to smaller scales for haloes observed at present time (Eulerian space), relative to the initial conditions (Lagrangian space). These corrections vary with halo mass, and we present approximate scalings with halo mass and redshift. We also discuss simple applications of these effects to galaxy samples with nonvanishing satellite fraction, where the stochasticity can again deviate strongly from the fiducial Poisson expectation. Overall, these effects affect the clustering of galaxies at a level of a few percent even on very large scales and need to be modeled properly if we want to extract high precision cosmological information from the upcoming galaxy redshift surveys.

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 · 10.1103/physrevd.88.083507

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 184

Metadata

Authors
Baldauf, T., Seljak, U., Smith, R. E., Hamaus, N., & Desjacques, V.
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
2013-10-10
Volume
88
Issue
8
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-7998
  • 1550-2368
OpenAlex
W2055502763
Cited by
184
References
3
FWCI
7.48
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: Halo stochasticity from exclusion and nonlinear clustering. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevd.88.083507
The paper
Baldauf, T., Seljak, U., Smith, R. E., Hamaus, N., & Desjacques, V. (2013). Halo stochasticity from exclusion and nonlinear clustering. Physical Review D. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.88.083507

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.