Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 202

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Halo mass function and scale-dependent bias from N-body simulations with non-Gaussian initial conditions: Halo-clustering and early non-Gaussianity

Open access
Pillepich, Annalisa, Porciani, Cristiano, Hahn, Oliver·2010·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We perform a series of high-resolution N-body simulations of cosmological structure formation starting from Gaussian and non-Gaussian initial conditions. We adopt the best-fitting cosmological parameters from the third- and fifth-year data releases of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, and we consider non-Gaussianity of the local type parametrized by eight different values of the non-linearity parameter fNL. Building upon previous work based on the Gaussian case, we show that, when expressed in terms of suitable variables, the mass function of friends-of-friends haloes is approximately universal (i.e. independent of redshift, cosmology and matter transfer function) to good precision (nearly 10 per cent) also in non-Gaussian scenarios. We provide fitting formulae for the high-mass end (M > 1013h−1 M⊙) of the universal mass function in terms of fNL, and we also present a non-universal fit in terms of both fNL and z to be used for applications requiring higher accuracy. For Gaussian initial conditions, we extend our fit to a wider range of halo masses (M > 2.4 × 1010h−1 M⊙) and we also provide a consistent fit of the linear halo bias. We show that, for realistic values of fNL, the matter power spectrum in non-Gaussian cosmologies departs from the Gaussian 1 by up to 2 per cent on the scales where the baryonic-oscillation features are imprinted on the two-point statistics. Finally, using both the halo power spectrum and the halo-matter cross spectrum, we confirm the strong k-dependence of the halo bias on large scales (k < 0.05 h Mpc−1) which was already detected in previous studies. However, we find that commonly used parametrizations based on the peak-background split do not provide an accurate description of our simulations which present extra dependencies on the wavenumber, the non-linearity parameter and, possibly, the clustering strength. We provide an accurate fit of the simulation data that can be used as a benchmark for future determinations of fNL with galaxy 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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15914.x

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 202

Metadata

Authors
Pillepich, A., Porciani, C., & Hahn, O.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2009-12-30
Volume
402
Issue
1
Pages
191-206
ISSN
0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2141383874
Cited by
202
References
4
FWCI
17.82
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 mass function and scale-dependent bias from N-body simulations with non-Gaussian initial conditions: Halo-clustering and early non-Gaussianity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15914.x
The paper
Pillepich, A., Porciani, C., & Hahn, O. (2010). Halo mass function and scale-dependent bias from N-body simulations with non-Gaussian initial conditions: Halo-clustering and early non-Gaussianity. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15914.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.