Exploring the evolution of red and blue galaxies in different cosmic web environments using IllustrisTNG simulation
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Study title: "Exploring the Evolution of Red and Blue Galaxies in Different Cosmic Web Environments Using IllustrisTNG Simulation" by Biswajit Pandey and Anindita Nandi
- Analysis spans redshift $z=3$ to $z=0
- Otsu's method used for galaxy classification as red or blue at each redshift
- Geometric environments determined based on eigenvalues of deformation tensor
- Initially, blue galaxies more prevalent in clusters compared to filaments, sheets, and voids; shifts at lower redshifts with red fractions increasing earlier in denser environments
- Most massive galaxies ($\log(\frac{M_{*}}{M_{\odot}})>10.5$) quenched across all environments at $z<1$
- Low-mass galaxies ($\log(\frac{M_{*}}{M_{\odot}})<10.5$ show stronger influence from surroundings, clusters host higher proportions of red galaxies at lower redshifts
- Slower mass growth for low-mass galaxies in clusters at $z<1
- Filaments exhibit relative red fractions comparable to clusters for low masses but harbor nearly 60% of low-mass blue galaxies, indicating diverse galaxy population experiencing broader range of evolutionary stages due to less intense environmental quenching
- Clusters display highest relative blue fraction for high-mass galaxies at lower redshifts attributed to interactions or mergers reigniting star formation temporarily
- $(u-r)$ color distribution transitions from unimodal to bimodal by $z=2$ across all environments; clusters exhibit highest median color and lowest median specific star formation rate (sSFR) at $z<1$
- Stellar mass primary driver of color evolution in massive galaxies; complex interplay between mass and environment shapes evolutionary trajectory of low-mass galaxies
Authors: Biswajit Pandey, Anindita Nandi
Abstract: We analyze the evolution of red and blue galaxies in different cosmic web environments from redshift $z=3$ to $z=0$ using the IllustrisTNG simulation. We use Otsu's method to classify the red or blue galaxies at each redshift and determine their geometric environments from the eigenvalues of the deformation tensor. Our analysis shows that initially, blue galaxies are more common in clusters followed by filaments, sheets and voids. However, this trend reverses at lower redshifts, with red fractions rising earlier in denser environments. At $z<1$, most massive galaxies ($\log(\frac{M_{*}}{M_{\odot}})>10.5$) are quenched across all environments. In contrast, low-mass galaxies ($\log(\frac{M_{*}}{M_{\odot}})<10.5$) are more influenced by their environment, with clusters hosting the highest red galaxy fractions at low redshifts. We observe a slower mass growth for low-mass galaxies in clusters at $z<1$. Filaments show relative red fractions (RRF) comparable to clusters at low masses, but host nearly $60\%$ of low-mass blue galaxies, representing a diverse galaxy population. It implies that less intense environmental quenching in filaments allows galaxies to experience a broader range of evolutionary stages. Despite being the densest environment, clusters display the highest relative blue fraction (RBF) for high-mass galaxies, likely due to interactions or mergers that can temporarily rejuvenate star formation in some of them. The $(u-r)$ colour distribution transitions from unimodal to bimodal by redshift $z=2$ across all environments. At $z<1$, clusters exhibit the highest median colour and lowest median specific star formation rate (sSFR), with stellar mass being the primary driver of colour evolution in massive galaxies. Our study suggests that stellar mass governs quenching in high-mass galaxies, while a complex interplay of mass and environment shapes the evolution of low-mass galaxies.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.