Weak lensing constraints on the stellar-to-halo mass relation of galaxy groups with simulation-informed scatter

TL;DR

This study uses weak lensing data to refine the stellar-to-halo mass relation for galaxy groups, incorporating simulation-based scatter models to improve the accuracy of the relation and better understand galaxy formation.

Contribution

It introduces a simulation-informed scatter model into the halo model framework, enhancing the constraints on the stellar-to-halo mass relation from weak lensing data.

Findings

Agreement with simulations for halos >10^{13.5} M_sun

Inclusion of scatter models tightens relation constraints

Miscentring effects are significant but not fully constrained

Abstract

Understanding the scaling relation between baryonic observables and dark matter halo properties is crucial not only for studying galaxy formation and evolution, but also for deriving accurate cosmological constraints from galaxy surveys. In this paper, we constrain the stellar-to-halo mass relation of galaxy groups identified by the Galaxy and Mass Assembly survey, using weak lensing signals measured by the Kilo-Degree Survey. We compare our measured scaling relation with predictions from the FLAMINGO hydrodynamical simulations and the L-Galaxies semi-analytical model. We find a general agreement between our measurements and simulation predictions for halos with masses ${\gtrsim}10^{13.5}\ h_{70}^{-1}{\rm M}_{\odot}$, but observe slight discrepancies with the FLAMINGO simulations at lower halo masses. We explore improvements to the current halo model framework by incorporating simulation-informed scatter in the group stellar mass distribution as a function of halo mass. We find that including a simulation-informed scatter model tightens the constraints on scaling relations, despite the current data statistics being insufficient to directly constrain the variable scatter. We also test the robustness of our results against different statistical models of miscentring effects from selected central galaxies. We find that accounting for miscentring is essential, but our current measurements do not distinguish among different miscentring models.