The nature of voids: I. Watershed void finders and their connection with theoretical models
Seshadri Nadathur, Shaun Hotchkiss

TL;DR
This study analyzes voids in cosmological simulations using watershed algorithms, revealing discrepancies between observed void properties and theoretical models, and highlighting the influence of tracer sampling on void density measurements.
Contribution
It provides a detailed empirical analysis of void properties in simulations, connecting watershed void finders with theoretical models and exposing limitations of existing density profile fits.
Findings
Larger voids tend to have deeper density minima.
Tracer density at voids is usually lower than true density, depending on sampling.
Void density profiles do not match theoretical expectations.
Abstract
The statistical study of voids in the matter distribution promises to be an important tool for precision cosmology, but there are known discrepancies between theoretical models of voids and the voids actually found in large simulations or galaxy surveys. The empirical properties of observed voids are also not well understood. In this paper, we study voids in an N-body simulation, using the ZOBOV watershed algorithm. As in other studies, we use sets of subsampled dark matter particles as tracers to identify voids, but we use the full-resolution simulation output to measure dark matter densities at the identified locations. Voids span a wide range of sizes and densities, but there is a clear trend towards larger voids containing deeper density minima, a trend which is expected for all watershed void finders. We also find that the tracer density at void locations is usually smaller than…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
