Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 444

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A halo-based galaxy group finder: calibration and application to the 2dFGRS

Open access
Yang, Xiaohu, Mo, H. J., van den Bosch, Frank C., Jing, Y. P.·2005·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08560.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We use the halo occupation model to calibrate galaxy group finders in magnitude-limited redshift surveys. Since, according to the current scenario of structure formation, galaxy groups are associated with cold dark matter halos, we make use of the properties of the halo population in the design of our group finder. The method starts with an assumed mass-to-light ratio to assign a tentative mass to each group. This mass is used to estimate the size and velocity dispersion of the underlying halo that hosts the group, which in turn is used to determine group membership (in redshift space). This procedure is repeated until no further changes occur in group memberships. We find that the final groups selected this way are insensitive to the mass-to-light ratio assumed. We use mock catalogues, constructed using the conditional luminosity function (CLF), to test the performance of our group finder in terms of completeness of true members and contamination by interlopers. Our group finder is more successful than the conventional Friends-of-Friends group finder in assigning galaxies in common dark matter halos to a single group. We apply our group finder to the 2-degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey and compare the resulting group properties with model predictions based on the CLF. For the $Λ$CDM `concordance' cosmology we find a clear discrepancy between the model and data in the sense that the model predicts too many rich groups. In order to match the observational results we have to either increase the mass-to-light ratios of rich clusters to a level significantly higher than current observational estimates, or to assume $σ_8 \simeq 0.7$, compared to the `concordance' value of 0.9.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08560.x

Cites

59 of 59 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 59 references

Cited by

See all 444

Metadata

Authors
Yang, X., Mo, H. J., van den Bosch, F. C., & Jing, Y. P.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2005-02
Volume
356
Issue
4
Pages
1293-1307
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
DOI
10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08560.x
OpenAlex
W2103612329
Cited by
444
References
59
FWCI
12.88
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: A halo-based galaxy group finder: calibration and application to the 2dFGRS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08560.x
The paper
Yang, X., Mo, H. J., van den Bosch, F. C., & Jing, Y. P. (2005). A halo-based galaxy group finder: calibration and application to the 2dFGRS. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08560.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.