text:
# A method for detecting 𝜈_𝜏 appearance in the spectra of quasielastic CC events

## Abstract

A method for detecting the transition $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ in long-baseline accelerator experiments, that consists in comparing the far-to-near ratios of the spectra of quasielastic CC events generated by high- and low-energy beams of muon neutrinos, is proposed. The test may be accessible to big water Cherenkov detectors and iron–scintillator calorimeters, and is limited by statistics rather than systematics.

PACS: 14.60.Pq; 14.60.Fg
Keywords: Neutrino oscillations, $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance

The data of Super-Kamiokande  favor the transition $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ as the source of the deficit of muon neutrinos from the atmosphere. However, this still has to be verified by directly observing $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance in accelerator long-baseline experiments. The options discussed thus far, all involving fine instrumentation on a large scale, are to detect the secondary $`\tau `$ by range in emulsion , by Cherenkov light of the $`\tau `$ , or by the transverse momentum carried away by the decay neutrino(s) . By contrast, in this paper we wish to formulate a $`\tau `$ signature that is solely based on the energy spectra of CC events, and therefore should be accessible to water Cherenkov detectors and to relatively coarse calorimeters with muon spectrometry. We assume that the experiment includes a near detector of the same structure as the far detector, irradiated by the same neutrino beam but over a short baseline that rules out any significant effects of neutrino oscillations . Thereby, the systematic uncertainties in comparing the interactions of primary and oscillated neutrinos are largely eliminated. Our aim is to distinguish the muonic decays of $`\tau `$ leptons against the background of $`\nu _\mu `$-induced CC events. In order to minimize the effects of $`\nu _\mu `$ disappearance, the data collected with a harder $`\tau `$-producing beam are compared with those for a softer reference beam in which $`\tau `$ production is suppressed by the threshold effect. The analysis is restricted to quasielastics (QE), that is, to neutrino events featuring a muon and small hadronic energy.

As soon as the first maximum of the oscillation lies below the mean energy of muon neutrinos in the beam, or $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2L/E_\nu <1.24`$ eV2km/GeV, much of the signal from QE production and muonic decay of the $`\tau `$ is at relatively low values of visible energy $`E`$. That is because the tau neutrinos arising from $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ are softer on average than muon neutrinos, the threshold effect is relatively mild for quasielastics, and a large fraction of incident energy is taken away by the two neutrinos from $`\tau ^{}\mu ^{}\nu \overline{\nu }`$. Let $`f(E)`$ be the spectrum of QE events observed in the far detector, $`n(E)`$—the spectrum of similar events in the near detector that has been extrapolated and normalized to the location of the far detector, and $`R(E)`$—the ratio of the two: $`R(E)=f(E)/n(E)`$. In the case of $`\nu _\mu `$ disappearance through the transitions $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ or $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$, where $`\nu _\mathrm{s}`$ is the hypothesized sterile neutrino, the ratio $`R`$ for the harder beam should be identically equal to that for the softer beam: $`R_{\mathrm{hard}}(E)=R_{\mathrm{soft}}(E)`$. However, in the case of $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ this equation is violated by the process of $`\tau `$ production and muonic decay, that predominantly occurs in the harder beam and shows up as a low-$`E`$ enhancement of the corresponding ”far” spectrum $`f_{\mathrm{hard}}(E)`$. This causes the ratio $`R_{\mathrm{hard}}`$ to exceed $`R_{\mathrm{soft}}`$ towards low values of visible energy $`E`$. The latter effect, that may provide a specific signature of $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance, is investigated in this paper.

In the simulations reported below, the harder (or $`\tau `$-producing) and softer (or reference) beams of muon neutrinos are respectively assigned as the high- and low-energy beams from the Main Injector (MI) at Fermilab, as foreseen by the NuMI program . The mean $`\nu _\mu `$ energies in these beams are close to 12 and 5 GeV, respectively. Again as in the NuMI program, a baseline of 730 km is assumed throughout. The systematic uncertaities on the near spectra $`n(E)`$ are neglected111The systematic uncertainty on $`n(E)`$, that arises from correcting the spectrum in the near detector for the neutrino source not being pointlike, is analyzed in . For the statistics considered in this paper, the overall uncertainty on the effect is still dominated by statistical errors. Furthermore, we may expect that systematic uncertainties on $`n(E)`$ for the high- and low-energy beams from the Main Injector are correlated and, therefore, will partially cancel in the difference of far-to-near ratios for these two beams.. The two detector types considered are an iron–scintillator calorimeter and a water Cherenkov detector.

Charged-current interactions of the $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ are generated using the NEUGEN package that is based on the Soudan-2 Monte Carlo . This generator takes full account of exclusive channels like quasielastics proper and excitation of baryon resonances, that are important for our analysis of CC events with small hadronic energy.

The iron–scintillator calorimeter is assumed to be the MINOS detector  that is in construction stage. The detector response is not simulated in full detail; instead, the resolution in muon energy is approximated as $`\delta E_\mu =0.11\times E_\mu ^{\mathrm{true}}`$ and in energy transfer to hadrons—as $`\delta \nu `$ (GeV) = $`0.55\times \sqrt{\nu ^{\mathrm{true}}}`$ . Quasielastic events are selected as those with $`E_\mu >800`$ MeV and $`\nu <1`$ GeV, where $`E_\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ are the smeared values of muon energy and of energy transfer to hadrons, respectively222These selections should be viewed as illustrative. The actual selections will be based on a detailed simulation of detector response to CC events with small hadronic energy.. Given the characteristic topology of such events in the detector (a single track traversing more than three nuclear interaction lengths in iron plus a few scintillator hits near the primary vertex), we assume that they are reconstructed with 100% efficiency and that the background from pion punchthrough is insignificant. The visible energy of a CC event, $`E`$, is estimated in terms of smeared quantities: $`E=E_\mu +\nu `$.

We also analyze the performance of a water Cherenkov detector, in which $`\nu _\mu `$-induced quasielastics have a characteristic signature of muonlike single-ring events . Analyzing the multi-GeV exiting muons, particularly in the smaller near detector, may require a device of the AQUA-RICH type  or an instrumented muon absorber downstream of the water tank. In our simulation for the water Cherenkov detector, QE events are selected as those featuring a single muon with momentum above 200 MeV, no additional charged secondaries with momenta above the Cherenkov threshold in water, and no $`\pi ^0`$ mesons in the final state. For the quasielastic reaction $`\nu _\mu n\mu ^{}p`$, this implies an energy transfer to the nucleon of less than 0.47 GeV. (Some 70% of thus selected events are due to quasielastics proper.) Muon energy is then smeared according to $`\delta E_\mu =0.05\times E_\mu ^{\mathrm{true}}`$, and neutrino energy is estimated assuming quasielastic scattering on a free neutron:

$$E=\frac{m_NE_\mu m_\mu ^2/2}{m_NE_\mu +p_\mu \mathrm{cos}\theta _\mu }.$$
(1)
Here, $`m_N`$ and $`m_\mu `$ are the neutron and muon masses, and $`p_\mu `$ and $`\theta _\mu `$ are the muon momentum and angle relative to incident neutrino, respectively.

Shown in Fig. 1 are the oscillation-free near spectra of selected QE events, $`n(E)`$, for the two beams and two detectors considered. In the absence of oscillations, 10 (50) kton–year exposures of the iron–scintillator (water Cherenkov) detector in the softer and harder beams will yield some 1200 (1600) and 4700 (4900) $`\nu _\mu `$-induced QE events, respectively333In all numerical estimates, we do not take into account the discussed upgrade of the proton driver at Fermilab  that may result in a substantial increase of neutrino flux from the Main Injector.. Assuming either $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ or $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$ driven by $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ = 0.01 eV2 and maximal mixing of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta `$ = 1, the far-to-near ratios $`R(E)`$ for either beam and either detector are illustrated in Fig. 2444In the Figures, statistical fluctuations are suppressed for the data points themselves, but the error bars are for the statistics as indicated.. That the ratios $`R(E)`$ for the transitions $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$ diverge towards low values of $`E`$ is evident for the harder beam in which $`\tau `$ production is not suppressed. Again considering $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$ with maximal mixings, in Fig. 3 we plot the difference

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R(E)=R_{\mathrm{hard}}R_{\mathrm{soft}}$$

for various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$. Indeed, at visible energies below some 4 GeV $`\mathrm{\Delta }R(E)`$ deviates from zero for the transition $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$, while staying close to zero for $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$. This deviation may be viewed as a signature of $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance. The naive expectation for $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }R(E)=0`$, is violated by the smearing of neutrino energy, and therefore is better fulfilled for the water Cherenkov detector.

By the time the proposed test can be implemented, the actual value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ will probably be estimated to some 10% by analyzing the $`\nu _\mu `$ disappearance in the MI low-energy beam . Given the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$, a consistent approach would be to fit $`\mathrm{\Delta }R(E)`$ to the predicted shape in order to estimate the mixing between the muon and tau neutrinos. A cruder measure of the effect is provided by the integral $`S=\mathrm{\Delta }R(E)𝑑E`$, which we estimate between $`E=1`$ and 3 GeV for the iron–scintillator detector, and between $`E=0.5`$ and 3 GeV for the water Cherenkov detector. Allowing for either $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$ with maximal mixing, the respective integrals $`S`$($`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$) and $`S`$($`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$) are plotted in Fig. 4 as functions of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$.

Since the reference beam produces many more low-energy events than the harder beam, the statistical error on the integral $`S`$ is largely determined by the statistics accumulated with the latter. Therefore, we fix the exposure of the iron–scintillator (water Cherenkov) detector in the reference beam at 10 (50) kton–years, and assume a similar or bigger exposure in the harder beam: 10(50), 20(100), or 40(200) kton–years. The respective statistical uncertainties on $`S`$($`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$) are illustrated by successive error corridors in Fig. 4. And finally, dividing the difference between $`S`$($`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$) and $`S`$($`\nu _\mu \nu _\mathrm{s}`$) by the statistical error on $`S`$($`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$), we estimate the statistical significance of the enhancement that is also depicted in Fig. 4.

We estimate that at a level of 3$`\sigma `$, the 10(50), 20(100), and 40(200) kton–year exposures of the iron–scintillator (water Cherenkov) detector in the MI high-energy beam will allow to probe $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance down to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ values of some 0.008 (0.005), 0.006 (0.004), and 0.005 (0.003) eV2, respectively. Thus in the NuMI program with the 5.4-kton MINOS detector and with the existing Proton Booster , the proposed test may be sensitive to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ values in the Kamiokande-allowed region , but not below some $`5\times 10^3`$ eV2 as suggested by the more recent results of Super-Kamiokande . On the other hand, a big ($`100`$ kton) water Cherenkov detector would allow to probe the transition $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ over a large portion of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ region favored by the analysis of atmospheric neutrinos in Super-Kamiokande555Apart from muonic decays of QE-produced $`\tau `$ leptons, a water Cherenkov detector may also allow to detect the electronic decays $`\tau ^{}e^{}\nu \overline{\nu }`$ in the spectra of single-ring electronlike events. This will require good understanding of the contribution of neutral-current $`\pi ^0`$ production to electronlike events (see, for example, )..

To conclude, we have proposed a test of $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance that consists in comparing the far-to-near ratios of the spectra of quasielastic CC events generated by different beams of muon neutrinos, and therefore may be accessible to water Cherenkov detectors and to calorimeters with muon spectrometry. The test is limited by statistics rather than systematics, and its significance crucially depends on the exposure in the harder beam in particular.


format: text

text:
# Polaron percolation in diluted magnetic semiconductors

## Abstract

We theoretically study the development of spontaneous magnetization in diluted magnetic semiconductors as arising from a percolation of bound magnetic polarons. Within the framework of a generalized percolation theory we derive analytic expressions for the Curie temperature and the magnetization, obtaining excellent quantitative agreement with Monte Carlo simulation results and good qualitative agreement with experimental results.

Diluted magnetic semiconductors (*e. g.* In1-xMnxAs, Ga1-xMnxAs), which are materials with some fraction of the nonmagnetic lattice atoms replaced by magnetic atoms (*i. e.* a fraction $`x`$ of Ga or In atoms being randomly replaced by Mn atoms), have attracted a great deal of attention sds1 ; sds3 ; sds7 ; sds8 ; sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12 ; sds6 ; sds9 ; sds11  following the recent discovery sds4  of ferromagnetism in Ga1-xMnxAs, with a Curie temperature $`T_c100`$K in the $`x=0.030.07`$ range. The subject is of considerable fundamental and technological interest. Technologically, a semiconductor, which is also a ferromagnet, raises the exciting potential of spintronic applications sds5  where logic and memory operations could in principle be seamlessly integrated on a single device. From a fundamental perspective, understanding ferromagnetism in a novel material (which is also a semiconductor) is an important challenge, particularly so in this case in light of the extensive existing earlier work involving doped II-VI semiconductor materials (as against the systems of current interest, which are magnetically doped III-V systems) which were never convincingly found to be ferromagnetic except perhaps with extremely low values of $`T_c`$. It is therefore not surprising that there has been a great deal of theoretical activity sds1 ; sds3 ; sds7 ; sds8 ; sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12 ; sds6 ; sds9 ; sds11  trying to understand the ferromagnetic mechanism in GaMnAs. Although no theoretical consensus on the precise ferromagnetic mechanism has yet been reached in the literature it is now established that the interaction between the magnetic atoms, which leads to the ferromagnetic phase at low enough temperatures, is induced by charge carriers (holes in the case of GaMnAs) in the semiconductor host. Theoretical investigation of these systems is hampered by the fact that both disorder and interactions are strong and must be taken into account non-perturbatively. This problem has been approached in a number of ways, including theoretical approximations assuming charge carriers being almost free sds1 ; sds3 ; sds7 ; sds8  and numerical studies in the opposite limit of strongly localized charge carriers sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12 . However, a comprehensive understanding of the physics of diluted magnetic semiconductors has not been achieved yet.

Theoretical approaches sds1 ; sds3 ; sds7 ; sds8  treating the charge carriers as free carriers in the valence band of the semiconductor have employed the simple Weiss mean field theory incorporating the band structure details (*e.g.* spin-orbit coupling, etc.), without taking into account effects of disorder. While this approach is claimed to provide quantitatively accurate values of $`T_c`$, it fails qualitatively in accounting for experimentally observed transport properties sds13  of GaMnAs where the resistivity is very high and seems to obey a Mott variable range hopping behavior at low temperatures reminiscent of an insulating system. In addition, the resistivity always decreases with increasing temperature above $`T_c`$, which is again typical of a localized insulating system. The free-carrier mean-field approach also fails to explain the recently reported sds14  dependence of $`T_c`$ on annealing which indicates a crucial role for disorder. A recent dynamical mean field theory calculation sds11  concluded that the ferromagnetic GaMnAs may actually belong to a situation where the carriers are just on the edge of being strongly localized. The approach sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12  treating the carriers as localized carriers in a semiconductor impurity band (thus being opposite to the the free-carrier mean-field approach), which has so far been explored only numerically, also leads to reasonable agreement with experiments and indicates a very strong dependence of $`T_c`$ on disorder. In this paper we provide an analytical theory which takes into account both disorder and strong magnetic interaction starting with localized carriers and using the physically appealing magnetic polaron percolation picture. Our theory has a starting point similar to that in Refs. sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12  except that ours is a completely analytical physical theory in contrast to the numerical approach used in the works sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12 . Where applicable our analytical results agree well with the numerical results of Refs. sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12 .

In this paper we consider a system in which transition to the insulating state due to localization of the charge carriers occurs at temperatures higher than the Curie temperature $`T_c`$. The carriers will be called “holes” throughout the text of this paper since in GaMnAs the carries are holes although the theory to be developed in this paper applies equally to the situation where the carriers are electrons. Exchange interaction of localized holes with magnetic impurities leads to the formation of bound magnetic polarons sds15 ; WolffEtAl96 . Since the concentration of magnetic impurities is much larger than the hole concentration MatsukuraEtal98 , most likely due to compensation by As antisite defects, a bound magnetic polaron consists of one localized hole, and a large number of magnetic impurities around the hole localization center. Even though the direct exchange interaction of the localized holes is antiferromagnetic, the interaction between bound magnetic polarons may be ferromagnetic WolffEtAl96  at large enough concentrations of magnetic impurities. To understand the physics of this phenomenon, one may consider two neighboring polarons (Fig. 1). The localized holes of these polarons both act on the impurities surrounding them thus producing an effective magnetic field for these impurities. The energy minimum is reached by this system when the impurity spins are parallel to this effective field, and the magnitude of the field is maximum. The maximum of this effective magnetic field is achieved when the spins of the localized holes are parallel. Therefore at low temperatures the system should eventually reach the state where the spins of all holes point in the same direction, and all impurity spins point in the same or in the opposite direction, depending on the sign of the impurity-hole exchange interaction.

If the hole localization radius is much less than the characteristic distance between the localized holes, the disorder in the hole positions must have dramatic effect on the whole picture of the ferromagnetic transition. This notion has been confirmed by Berciu and Bhatt sds10 , who have shown, by means of numerical simulations, that both the Curie temperature and the shape of the magnetization curve $`M(T)`$ are indeed strongly affected by disorder. It has been known that the percolation theory EfrosShklovskiiBook  provides many adequate tools to deal with ferromagnetism in disordered systems with strong localization of carriers KorenblitShender78 . In this paper we present a quantitative description of the spontaneous magnetization in magnetic semiconductors within the framework of the percolation theory.

In our model, the charge carriers are localized. The hole wave function is assumed to fall off exponentially away from localization centers, with decay length $`a_B`$. We consider the low carrier density regime in which the mean distance between the localized holes is much larger than the hole localization radius, $`a_B^3n_h1`$. We note that for GaMnAs, $`a_B10`$ Å, and therefore our theory applies in the regime $`n_h10^{21}\text{cm}^3`$, with experimental $`n_h`$ values currently being around $`10^{19}\text{cm}^3`$. The localization centers are distributed randomly in the sample. Magnetic impurities are distributed within the sample with concentration $`n_in_h`$ randomly as well. The Hamiltonian of the system has the form

$$\widehat{H}=\underset{kj}{}J_{kj}\widehat{𝐒}_k\widehat{𝐬}_j,$$
(1)
where indices $`k`$ and $`j`$ label magnetic impurities and holes respectively, $`\widehat{𝐒}_k`$/$`\widehat{𝐬}_j`$ are the impurity/hole spin operators. Matrix elements $`J_{kj}`$ of the impurity-hole exchange interaction decay exponentially with the distance between the interacting impurity and hole, $`J_{kj}=J_0\mathrm{exp}(2|𝐫_k𝐫_j|/a_B)`$. The direct (antiferromagnetic) exchange interaction between the magnetic impurities is neglected, since their relative concentration $`x`$ in the lattice of the host semiconductor is much less than unity although this may be important for larger values of $`x`$, leading to the suppression of $`T_c`$. We will not discuss possible mechanisms of hole localization, since the properties of our model hold for any of them as long as the decay of the localized hole’s wave function is exponential.

At some temperature $`T`$, magnetic impurities that are at distances $`r<R_p(T)(a_B/2)\mathrm{ln}(sS|J_0|/T)`$ from hole localization centers have their spins strongly correlated with the spins of the corresponding holes (here $`s`$ and $`S`$ are the absolute values of the hole or impurity spin respectively). The spins which do not have a localized hole within a circle of radius $`R_p(T)`$ around them are essentially free. The quantity $`R_p(T)`$ is the effective radius of a magnetic polaron; it grows as the temperature is lowered. Clearly at low enough temperatures neighboring magnetic polarons overlap and interact with each other via interaction with impurities between them WolffEtAl96 . This interaction produces alignment of the polaron spins. When the cluster of correlated polarons having the size of the sample (the infinite cluster) appears, the ferromagnetic transition occurs.

Even though the picture presented above is qualitatively correct, one needs to find the maximum characteristic temperature $`T_{2p}(r)`$ at which the spins of two polarons at a given distance $`r`$ from each other are still strongly correlated. The Hamiltonian of a two-polaron subsystem is given by Eq. (1), where hole index $`j`$ takes only two values $`j_1`$ and $`j_2`$ corresponding to the two polarons under consideration. Our present goal is to find the characteristic spin-correlation temperature $`T_{2p}(r)`$ at given $`r`$, $`a_B`$, $`J_0`$, and $`n_i`$. Since we are interested in the system behavior only at and below the percolation transition, we may limit our consideration to polaron pairs with $`rn_h^{1/3}a_B`$. A rough preliminary estimate, which can be obtained from straightforward dimensional analysis, reads

$$T_{2p}(r)A(r,a_B,n_i)sS|J_0|\mathrm{exp}\left(r/a_B\right),$$
(2)
where dependence of the dimensionless prefactor function $`A(r,a_B,n_i)`$ on its arguments is weaker than exponential. Since at $`TsS|J_0|\mathrm{exp}(r/a_B)`$ the two polarons *must* be correlated, $`A1`$. At temperatures of the order of the right-hand side of Eq. (2), each polaron already has a large number of impurity spins near its center strongly polarized along the direction of the spin of its hole. Due to this coupling, the spin of the polaron’s hole becomes “massive,” and may be considered a classical field as far as its interaction with more remote impurities is concerned. This effective field produces polarization of the remote impurities; the characteristic value of the projection $`S_k^{(j_1)}`$ of the spin of $`k`$th impurity onto the spin direction of the $`j_1`$-th polaron is roughly $`S\mathrm{min}\{1,sJ_{kj_1}/T\}`$. The characteristic energy of interaction of this impurity with the other polaron is of the order of $`sSJ_{kj_2}`$, therefore the contribution of the $`k`$th impurity to the interaction of two polarons is of the order of $`S^2sJ_{kj_2}\mathrm{min}\{1,sJ_{kj_1}/T\}`$ \[here we assume that $`sSJ_{kj_1},T>sSJ_{kj_2}`$ since $`T_{2p}(r)sS|J_0|\mathrm{exp}(r/a_B)`$\]. This estimate allows us to determine which impurities are important for the interaction of two given polarons. Namely, these impurities are the ones in the lens-shaped region between the two localization centers, see Fig. 1. The diameter of this region is of the order of $`\sqrt{ra_B}`$; more remote impurities are interacting too weakly with both polarons to be of any importance. Finding the thickness of the lens-shaped region is less trivial. As we consider impurities away from the middle point and closer, say, to $`j_1`$, decrease of $`J_{kj_2}`$ is fully compensated by the increase of $`J_{kj_1}`$, until we enter the region where the spins of the impurities are saturated due to their proximity to $`j_1`$. Thus the size of the region of interest in the direction along $`𝒓_{j_1}𝒓_{j_2}`$ depends on the temperature. Since the characteristic correlation temperature $`T_{2p}(r)`$ is the quantity to find, we will proceed by iterations, starting with the value given by the right-hand side of Eq. (2) with $`A(r,a_B,n_i)=1`$ (so the thickness of the lens-shaped interaction region equals $`a_B`$). As we will see, just one iteration yields the answer with good precision.

We will take into account only the impurities in the interaction region; the total number of these impurities equals $`Na_B^2rn_i`$ in the first iteration. The coupling of each of these impurities to either hole is approximately $`J(r/2)J_0\mathrm{exp}(r/a_B)`$. It allows us to reduce the Hamiltonian to the following form:

$$\widehat{H}=sJ(r/2)\mathrm{cos}\frac{\theta }{2}\underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}𝑺_k^{(z)}.$$
(3)
Here the angle between the spins of the two polarons is denoted $`\theta `$, and the direction of the $`z`$ axis is chosen along the direction of the vector $`𝒔_{j_1}+𝒔_{j_2}`$. We have neglected spatial variation of the polaron exchange field in the interaction region, since the relative magnitude of this variation does not exceed unity.

The partition function of the system described by Hamiltonian (3) can easily be found, and after straightforward algebra we arrive at the expression for the average cosine of the angle $`\theta `$ between the spins of the two interacting polarons:

$$\mathrm{cos}\theta \{\begin{array}{cc}N[sSJ(r/2)/T]^2,\hfill & \sqrt{N}sS|J(r/2)|T\hfill \\ 1\frac{1}{N[sSJ(r/2)/T]^2},\hfill & \sqrt{N}sS|J(r/2)|T.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
Therefore, the spins of the two polarons at distance $`r`$ are correlated at temperatures below $`\sqrt{N}sS|J(r/2)|`$. Using the estimate $`Na_B^2rn_i`$, we finally arrive at

$$T_{2p}(r)a_B\sqrt{rn_i}sS|J_0|\mathrm{exp}\left(r/a_B\right).$$
(5)
The maximum possible distance $`r_{corr}(T)`$ between two polarons with correlated spins at a given temperature $`T`$ is therefore

$$r_{corr}(T)a_B\left[\mathrm{ln}\frac{sS|J_0|}{T}+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left(a_B^3n_i\mathrm{ln}\frac{sS|J_0|}{T}\right)\right].$$
(6)
Now we can use result (5) to get a better estimate for the thickness of the lens-shaped interaction region in order to perform the next iteration. It is determined by the condition $`J_{kj_{1,2}}<T`$, so the thickness is of the order of $`a_B\mathrm{ln}(a_B\sqrt{rn_i})`$. The resulting correction to $`T_{2p}(r)`$ is just a factor of $`\mathrm{ln}(a_B\sqrt{rn_i})`$. Taking this correction into account is clearly beyond the accuracy limits of the approximation used above, so we neglect it, and use Eq. (5) as our final result.

Now we consider a system of randomly placed magnetic polarons. As the temperature is being lowered, the spins of neighboring polarons become aligned, and clusters of polarons with the same spin appear. At any given temperature $`T`$, the polarons separated by a distance smaller than $`r_{corr}(T)`$ are joined into magnetic clusters. The lower the temperature, the more such “links” between polarons are established, and the larger the average cluster size. Finally, at low enough temperatures, a cluster having the dimensions of the sample, the so called “infinite cluster” appears, and the magnetization of the sample acquires some finite value. The problem of finding the transition temperature is identical to the problem of finding the critical percolation radius in the problem of randomly placed overlapping spheres EfrosShklovskiiBook . The latter problem has been solved numerically, and it has been demonstrated that the infinite cluster forms in the system when the link length reaches the value $`r_{perc}0.86/\sqrt[3]{n_h}`$ PikeSeager74 . Substituting this expression into Eq. (5), we get the expression for the ferromagnetic transition temperature

$$T_ca_B\sqrt{n_i}n_h^{1/6}sS|J_0|\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{0.86}{a_B\sqrt[3]{n_h}}\right).$$
(7)
The limit of applicability of Eq. (7) is determined by the condition $`a_B^3n_h1`$. A similar exponent was obtained in Ref. KorenblitEtAl73  for ferromagnetic transition in PdFe alloys.

It is instructive to point out that our Eq. (7) is consistent with the mean-field result derived in the literature sds1 ; sds3 ; sds7 ; sds8  for the opposite limit of almost free holes,

$$T_cn_iJ_{\text{mf}}^2\xi (T_c),$$

where $`J_{\text{mf}}`$ is related to $`J_0`$ of Eq. (1) by $`J_{\text{mf}}a_B^3J_0`$, and $`\xi (T)n_h/\mathrm{max}\{\epsilon _F,T\}`$ is the magnetic susceptibility of holes, with $`\epsilon _F`$ being the Fermi energy. In the case of low electron density, $`T\epsilon _F`$

$$T_c\sqrt{n_in_h}|J_{\text{mf}}|,$$

which matches the result (7) of the bound-polaron picture at the limit of applicability of the latter, $`a_B^3n_h1`$.

Since $`n_hn_i`$, one polaron includes many magnetic impurities, and the total magnetization of the sample is that of impurities:

$$M(T)=Sn_i𝒱[r_{corr}(T,n_i,n_h,a_B)\sqrt[3]{n_h}],$$
(8)
where $`r_{corr}`$ is defined by Eq. (6), the and universal function $`𝒱(y)`$ is the infinite cluster’s volume in the model of overlapping spheres; it depends only on the product $`y`$ of the spheres’ diameter and the cubic root of their concentration.

Using Eqs. (6) and (7), we cast Eq. (8) in the form

$$\frac{M(T)}{M(0)}=𝒱\left(0.86+\left(a_B^3n_h\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{ln}\frac{T_c}{T}\right),$$
(9)
with the Curie temperature $`T_c`$ given by Eq. (7). One can see that the shape of the magnetization curve is determined by only one dimensionless parameter $`a_B^3n_h`$, while the expression (7) for $`T_c`$ is more complicated and depends on all parameters of the model. Fig. 2 shows the temperature dependence of the magnetization at two values of $`a_B^3n_h`$; the curve is more concave at smaller values of this parameter, which is precisely the experimental observation. Our magnetization results agree with the numerical results of Ref. sds10  and are consistent with the experimental magnetization data in GaMnAs, particularly for systems with lower values of $`T_c`$ where our polaron percolation picture applies better due to stronger carrier localization associated with lower values of $`a_B^3n_h`$.

To conclude we have developed an analytic polaron percolation theory for DMS ferromagnetism in the limit of low carrier density or equivalently strong carrier localization $`a_B^3n_h1`$. Interestingly our polaron percolation theory reproduces the free carrier Weiss mean field theory in the limit of $`a_B^3n_h1`$. Our analytic results are in good agreement with existing numerical results in the strongly localized limit sds2 ; sds10 ; sds12 . The experimental DMS currently have $`a_B^3n_h10^110^3`$ which makes our theory marginally applicable to the experimental systems, and we get reasonable agreement with experimental results for $`T_c`$ and for $`M(T)`$.

This work was supported by the US-ONR, the LPS, and DARPA. We thank B. I. Shklovskii for useful discussion on percolation theory.


text:
# Spacetime & Substance 2, no. 4, 169-170 (2001)

## Spacetime & Substance 2, no. 4, 169-170 (2001)

## ON THE MASS OF ELEMENTARY CARRIERS OF GRAVITATIONAL INTERACTION

Volodymyr Krasnoholovets

Institute of Physics, National Academy of Sciences

Prospect Nauky 46, UA-03028 Kyïv, Ukraine http://inerton.cjb.net

Abstract: Based on the theory of submicroscopic quantum mechanics recently constructed by the author the mass of elementary spatial excitations called inertons, which accompany a moving particle, is estimated herein. These excitations are treated as carriers of both inertial and gravitational properties of the particle.

Key words: space, inertons, mass, gravitation

PACS: 03.65.Bz Foundations, theory of measurement, miscellaneous theories.
03.75.-b Matter waves. 04.60.-m Quantum gravity

In a series of recent papers by the author \[1-4\] submicroscopic quantum mechanics has been constructed. It easily results in the Schrödinger and Dirac formalisms on the atom scale. The theory has predicted the existence of peculiar spatial excitations around a moving particle. Those excitations have been identified with a substructure of the matter waves and been called ”inertons”. The theory has successfully been verified experimentally, namely, it has been demonstrated how inertons manifest themselves in numerous experiments  and, moreover, inertons have been recorded in our experiments as well \[6-8\].

Detailed theoretical consideration \[1-5\] of the motion of a canonical elementary particle in the real space that is characterized by a submicroscopic structure (and the particle is an element of the space as well), allows an evaluation of the value of mass of elementary excitations – inertons – of a space substrate (i.e. quantum aether).

Elementary excitations of the space substrate are created due to collisions of a moving particle by superparticles – primary cells of the structure of the real space. The excitations were called inertons  because, in essence, they reflex inert properties of the particle, i.e. inertons appear owing to the resistance which the particle experiences at its motion on the side of the space substrate that in turns is specified by quantum properties. Amplitude $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the particle’s inerton cloud that surrounds the moving particle obeys the relationship

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\lambda c/v_0$$
(1)
where $`\lambda `$ is the de Broglie wavelength of the particle, $`v_0`$ is its initial velocity, and $`c`$ is the velocity of light.

According to the author’s concept \[1-5\], a particle is created from a degenerate superparticle. Therefore a particle should be treated as a local curvature of the space. The notion of the mass is associated with the alteration of an initial volume of the mother superparticle. Around a particle, a deformation coat, or crystallite, is formed that consists of superparticles which possess mass. Beyond the crystallite superparticles are massless. Thus the crystallite plays the role of a screen that shields the particle from the degenerate space substrate. The total mass of massive superparticles of the crystallite is equal to the mass $`m_{v__0}`$ of the particle , which is found in the center of the crystallite. The size of the crystallite is estimated by the length of the Compton wavelength $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{v__0}=h/m_{v__0}c`$. As the solid state physics teaches, the availability of the crystal structure automatically implied the appearance of elementary vibrational excitations in the crystallite .

Inertons should be considered as a substructure of the matter waves \[3-5\]. In papers  it has been noted that the kinetic energy of an emitted inerton is directly proportional to the energy of the particle that the particle had had at the moment of the collision with the vibrating mode of the crystallite. Both the energy of the particle and that of the mode decrease from collision to collision. Therefore the same should occur for emitted inertons: the energy of the $`(i+1)`$th inerton is less than the energy of the $`i`$the one. Since we assume that the initial velocity of emitted inertons has an order of the velocity of light $`c`$, we should conclude that the mass of emitted inertons gradually decreases as well, i.e. $`m_{i+1}<m_i`$.

For instance, if the velocity of the particle $`v_0c`$, then the inequality $`m_i>m_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ holds in the beginning, where $`m_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ is the averaged mass of the crystallite’s superparticle. In other words the inequality is correct at a small value of $`i`$ (we recall that $`i=\overline{1,N}`$ where $`N`$ is the total number of collisions of the particle along its half de Broglie wavelength $`\lambda /2`$. In this case amplitude $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ of the $`i`$th emitted inerton prevails the crystallite size, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{v__0}`$.

However, as the index $`i`$ increases, the inerton mass diminishes and reaches values less than the mass of crystallite’s superparticles, $`m_i<m_{\mathrm{cr}}`$. In this case the amplitude of the inerton has a magnitude under the crystallite size, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i<\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_{v__0}`$.

The averaged mass $`m_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ of a superparticle in the crystallite can be estimated. For example, in the case of a nonrelativistic electron the Compton wavelength $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_0=2.42\times 10^{10}`$ cm. If we divide the crystallite volume $`\stackrel{~}{\lambda }_0^3`$ by the volume of a superparticle $`𝒱(10^{28})^3`$ cm3, we will get the number of superparticles in the crystallite $`N_{\mathrm{in}\mathrm{crys}.}10^{55}`$. Since the mass of the crystallite is taken to be the mass of the particle, we will obtain the following value for the mass of a crystallite’s superparticle: $`m_{\mathrm{cr}}=M_0^{\mathrm{electron}}/N_{\mathrm{in}\mathrm{crys}.}10^{85}`$ kg.

We can also evaluate the mean mass $`\overline{m}_{\mathrm{in}}`$ of an emitted inerton. For this purpose we should divide the total mass $`\mathrm{\Delta }M=(M_0/\sqrt{1v_0^2/c^2}M_0)`$ of the emitted inerton cloud by the number of emitted inertons $`N=\lambda /𝒱^{1/3}`$ (we recall that the cloud is emitted along the first half de Broglie wavelength $`\lambda /2`$, then it is absorbed in the next section $`\lambda /2`$ of the particle path, and so on).

Setting $`v_0`$ equals $`0.01c`$ to $`0.999c`$, we obtain:

$`\overline{m}_{\mathrm{in}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M_0/\sqrt{1v_0^2/c^2}M_0}{\lambda /𝒱^{1/3}}}`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`10^{57}\mathrm{to}10^{45}\mathrm{kg}.`$
In the case of inertons emitted by atoms which vibrate in a solid, $`\overline{m}_{\mathrm{in}}`$ falls in the broad range between values (2) and about $`10^{70}`$ kg (at the extremely low atom velocity $`v_01`$ $`\mu `$m/s).

The value of mass of carriers of a peculiar interaction between objects was estimated also by other researchers. For instance, Kolpakov  studying experimentally a nonelectromagnetic interaction between both extrasensitive participants and objects of abiotic environment proposed a pure classical mechanism of the propagation of excitations of an aether substance; his model yielded evaluation $`10^{73}`$ kg for the mass of carriers of the revealed interaction.

Starting from the field formulation of the general theory of relativity Zhuk  obtained for his ”gravitons”, carriers of the gravitational interaction, mass $`10^{69}`$ kg. It is interesting that this magnitude is approximately equal to an average value between mentioned inerton masses $`m_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ and $`\overline{m}_{\mathrm{in}}`$.

Thus, it can be concluded based on submicroscopic quantum mechanics that the value of mass of carriers of the inertial/garvitational interaction is not strongly fixed. Masses of inertons emitted and then absorbed by a moving particle is distributed in a wide spectral range. Note that a similar situation occurs in the case of the electromagnetic radiation: the photon frequency can vary from practically zero to the frequency of high-level $`\gamma `$-photon.


text:
# Voids in the Simulated Local Universe

## 1 Introduction

Early concerns about the existence of a hypothetical, spatially homogeneous population of galaxies may be traced back to the negative conclusions of Soneira & Peebles (1977), well before it was realized that the local universe contains huge regions apparently empty of normal, optically selected galaxies (Kirshner et al. 1981). More recent observations targetted specific classes of galaxy (e.g. dwarfs, low surface brightness or star-forming galaxies) finding that the optically-defined voids also seem strongly underdense in all these objects (see Section 2 of Peebles 2001 for a list of observations). There have been reports of the detection of some galaxies in previously defined voids, like Boötes (Dey et al. 1990; Szomoru et al. 1996a, b), but these are mostly normal, late-type spirals near the edge of the void region. Starting from a morphology density relation like that of Dressler (1980), one might expect the voids to be populated by a population of dwarf, faint galaxies. However, even these populations are not observed. As noted by Kirshner et al. (1981) and underlined by Peebles (2001, hereafter P01), *if* there is still substantial mass in the voids, the galaxies associated with DM haloes in the voids must be several magnitudes fainter than $`L_{}`$. The Magellanic-type irregulars close to the Local Group (Tully 1988; Peebles 1989; Peebles et al. 2000) seem to have formed in conditions quite comparable to those occurring in the voids so one might expect to find the same type of galaxy there.

Given that the same large underdense regions are observed in different surveys and populations, several groups have recently focused on the precise determination of the sizes and shapes of voids in large redshift surveys, like the *CfA* redshift survey (Vogeley et al. 1994), the *LCRS* (Müller et al. 2000; Müller & Arbabi-Bidgoli 2001), the *SSRS* and *IRAS* surveys (El-Ad et al. 1997; El-Ad & Piran 1997), and the *PSCz* survey (Plionis & Basilakos 2001). When comparing the voids in the *IRAS* 1.2 Jy survey and in the *ORS,* El-Ad & Piran (2000) found similar sizes and shapes, although the galaxy populations are very different in the two samples.

Some authors (White et al. 1987; Vogeley et al. 1994; Müller et al. 2000; Plionis & Basilakos 2001) have used simulations of the dark matter distribution in CDM models to compare to observations of “voids”. All of this work identified galaxy sites by simple statistical bias models rather than by *ab initio* galaxy formation modelling. Many authors also studied regions too small to provide reliable statistics. Vogeley et al. (1994) found that biased models (e.g. a flat, low-density CDM cosmology) generally produce voids that are similar to the observations in the *CfA* survey when considering bright galaxies, but which are too empty when including fainter galaxies. Müller et al. (2000) found their void statistics to be more sensitive to the criterion for galaxy identification than to the cosmological parameters themselves. Plionis & Basilakos (2001) compared the void shapes and sizes in the *PSCz* with six different CDM models. They found the distribution of void sizes to differ strongly between models. Models with high $`\sigma _8`$ like OCDM and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM provided the best fits.

The main drawback of these kinds of simulations is the necessity to put in the galaxies “by hand”, using an *ad hoc* bias recipe, and/or by assigning morphologies using the observed morphology-density relation.

In recent years, numerical simulations of structure formation in cosmological volumes have been extended in two different ways to include an explicit treatment of galaxy formation by means of semi-analytic techniques. In the faster, but less direct technique, galaxies are inserted in each dark halo at the time of observation based on a Monte-Carlo realization of the merging and galaxy formation history of a “random” halo of similar mass (Kauffmann et al. 1997; Governato et al. 1998; Benson et al. 2001a, b). In the more direct simulation technique, the full merging history of each halo in a simulation is stored and the semi-analytic formation prescriptions are implemented on these histories, producing a simulation in which the detailed formation history of each galaxy is followed explicitly (Kauffmann et al. 1999a, c; Diaferio et al. 1999, 2001; Somerville et al. 2001; Springel et al. 2001; Mathis et al. 2001).

The simulations of Kauffmann et al. (1997) were able to resolve LMC-like galaxies. These authors considered the void probability function (VPF) in an Einstein–de Sitter universe. They computed the VPF for bright ($`M_B<20`$) and faint ($`M_B<18`$) mock galaxies and for two corresponding random sets of DM particles in the simulation, each chosen to have the same number density as the selected galaxies. While they found in their Figure 14 a similar VPF for bright galaxies and the associated dark matter set, the VPF of their faint galaxies exhibited an extended tail as compared to the DM, showing that these faint objects tend to respect the voids defined by the bright ones, and to segregate from the dark matter.

Kauffmann et al. (1999b, hereafter K99) (see also Benson et al. 2001a) had coarser resolution, and did not compute void statistics. Instead one can get an idea of their predicted voids by means of the pictures of the galaxy distribution they provide. As noted by P01, visual inspection of the simulations shows large regions between the concentrations of $`L_{}`$ galaxies in clusters and filaments, which appear almost empty of galaxies (see figure 5 of K99). However, the extent to which these simulated voids retain a significant fraction of the mass, in the form of LMC-sized or smaller DM haloes, is unclear, even in the low-density $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model. If there are haloes in the voids, then no galaxies have been associated with them by the galaxy formation algorithm, and one has to check if this is due to the resolution limit or to a well-determined physical process.

*If* simulations still show a substantial number of lower mass DM haloes in “voids”, P01 considers this observed suppression of galaxy formation a “potential crisis” for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM paradigm. Note, however, that there may be possible remedies: for example, ionizing fluxes from the first structures may suppress nearby dwarf galaxy formation (Rees 1985; Srianand 1997; Cen & Ostriker 2000, see also Friedmann & Piran 2001). Alternatively, the Warm Dark Matter model of Bode et al. (2001) may help to solve the issue.

The goal of this paper is to help to clarify the situation of voids from a *numerical* point of view, using the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM simulation presented in Mathis et al. (2001, hereafter M01). This simulation was constrained so that the present-day DM distribution mimics the large scale structure of the local universe up to a distance of 8000 km s-1 from the Milky-Way. Galaxy formation was followed in this simulation using techniques similar to those of K99 and mock catalogues were extracted for comparison to the observed nearby galaxy distribution. The main clusters in the simulation appear at the position of observed clusters like Coma, Virgo, Hydra, Perseus and Centaurus and larger scale structures, including voids, correspond well. The simulations can track the formation and morphological evolution of dwarf galaxies of the size of the LMC, and can resolve the luminosity of galaxies 6 times fainter. The corresponding *morphology* and *luminosity* resolution limits of the simulation (defined as the mean, present-day $`B`$-band luminosities of the central galaxy of a 10 and 100 particle halo respectively) are $`M_B=16.27`$ and $`M_B=18.46`$. They correspond to halo virial circular velocities of haloes of $`54`$ and $`103`$ km s-1 and masses of $`3\times 10^{10}`$ and $`3\times 10^{11}h^1\text{ }M_{}`$ respectively (here and below we take h=0.7 when quoting absolute magnitudes).

The morphology resolution of the CR $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM simulation is only a factor 3 better than that of Kauffmann et al. (1997) but the volume simulated is 3 times larger. Also, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model currently seems a better bet than the EdS model they assumed. In addition the current galaxy formation algorithm is based on a much more detailed model including morphological evolution of the galaxies via merging, explosive (bursts) and quiescent star formation, and feedback.

Below we begin by using simple, “one-point” statistics to bring out a hypothetical void population. From the DM skeleton alone, we are able to check the claim of P01 on the fraction and typical masses of the haloes residing in underdense volumes. Simply by visual inspection of the DM distribution, we highlight regions which are depleted of even the smallest haloes that we can follow.

Then, within the whole simulated galaxy population, we select several subsamples (candidates for a void population), splitting according to a variety of possibly relevant properties: luminosity, colour, morphology. Also, we extract sets of haloes, binned by total mass. We study the typical densities (estimated on a 5 $`h^1`$ Mpc scale) in which these various populations reside, with the goal of finding a first signature of a void population. We recover the well-known pattern of halo bias. Blue, star-forming galaxies tend to reside in underdense regions, a trend which is also present but is not so marked for bulge-less galaxies.

Next we estimate the environment density dependence of the galaxy luminosity function, focussing on the variation of the shape and the normalization of the LF with the local mass density. We compute LFs in a series of density bins covering equal total volumes, and then in bins containing equal total mass. While the overall normalization of the LF is quite different between equal-volume bins, it is very similar between equal-mass bins. We find some tendency for the faint-end slope of the LF to vary with DM environment density.

Finally, we consider “multi-point” probes like correlation functions and nearest neighbour statistics. The correlation functions of our samples provide a check of the selection procedure. We recover the usual behaviour: in particular, red galaxies are much more clustered than blue ones, in agreement with K99. We stress, however, that it is difficult to deduce the relative spatial distribution of populations on the basis of their correlation functions.

Since Soneira & Peebles (1977), nearest neighbour statistics have been a common observational tool to discriminate between spatial distributions of objects. We carry out such an analysis in real space for our series of subsamples, taking $`L_{}`$ spiral galaxies as the neighbour population (following P01). We find that blue, star-forming galaxies are more weakly associated with $`L_{}`$ spirals than are other $`L_{}`$ spirals but otherwise we find no significant effect. We conclude that there is no dwarf-type void population in the simulation, down to our resolution limit.

The disposition of our paper is as follows: in Section 2, we begin with a qualitative, visual comparison between the galaxies that have formed in a void and in a cluster environment. The distribution of haloes in our void does not support the assertion of P01 that the voids should contain small haloes. Then, in Section 3, we describe the characteristics of our galaxy and DM halo subsamples. We show the distribution of our reference spirals in a slice spanning the supergalactic plane. Section 4 evaluates the environment densities for the various mock samples, and computes the density dependence of LFs. We switch to two-point statistics in Section 5. We check the correlation functions of our subsamples and then carry out a nearest neighbour analysis similar to that of P01. We summarize and conclude in Section 6.

## 2 An example of the galaxy distribution in a “void”

Figure 3 of M01 (see also the bottom right panel of Fig. 1 below) plots the simulated galaxy distribution within 8000 km s-1 of the Milky-Way, in a slice of thickness 30 $`h^1`$ Mpc centred on the supergalactic plane. Two large voids are visible: the first at (-60,-30) $`h^1`$ Mpc in (SGX,SGY), with a diameter of $`20h^1\text{ Mpc}`$, the other nearly opposite to the MW, at (40,50), where a galaxy separates two smaller voids, of diameter $`10h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ each. The same voids are seen in the real galaxy distribution for example the *PSCz* survey (consider Figure 2 of Plionis & Basilakos 2001).

As an example, we focus here on the void located at (40,50) $`h^1`$ Mpc, since it lies further inside high resolution region of the simulation, and may be less affected by the transition from the high-resolution to the low-resolution zone. We excise a cubic region of side 24 $`h^1`$ Mpc centred on the middle of the void.

The top left panel of Fig. 1 shows the distribution of all galaxies within this cube brighter than our luminosity resolution limit. The colors of the symbols scale with the $`BV`$ index, and their sizes with the B-magnitude of the galaxies. Because of the galaxy formation scheme adopted in M01, all DM haloes in the simulation with 10 or more particles contain at least one galaxy. Furthermore, with our definition of the luminosity resolution limit (the mean luminosity of the central galaxy of a 10-particle halo), one expects that a fair fraction of the haloes more massive than $`10\times M_{part}=3.57\times 10^{10}h^1\text{ }M_{}`$ will have an associated galaxy with $`M_B16.27`$, and so will appear on the top left picture of Fig. 1. In the region shown, 75% of all haloes have a central galaxy at least this bright. This is shown explicitly in the bottom left panel of Fig. 1, where we project the same low density region as in the top left panel, and mark with circles the positions of all DM haloes with 10 or more particles.

There are two obvious voids completely depleted of haloes, with diameters of order 10 and 8 $`h^1`$ Mpc and depths of 24 $`h^1`$ Mpc. This contradicts P01 who claims that in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model, low mass haloes should spread fairly evenly through the voids defined by the larger ones. In fact, gravity seems to have moved them out of these voids.

For comparison, we give in the top right panel of Fig. 1 the galaxy distribution around the simulated Virgo cluster ($`M_{200}4\times 10^{14}h^1\text{ }M_{}`$), also plotted in a cubic region of side 24 $`h^1`$ Mpc centred on the cluster centre. The galaxy symbols follow the same rules and scales as in the left panel. Note that to avoid saturating the cluster region, galaxies are plotted down to $`M_B=17`$ only.

## 3 Defining mock galaxy samples

The few isolated galaxies observed in the Boötes void are normal, late-type spirals (Szomoru et al. 1996a, b). Nevertheless, there is a widespread belief that voids should be filled by late-type and low surface brightness dwarfs. Observational programs have targetted a number of different potential “void” populations: Eder et al. (1989) and Lee et al. (2000) considered dwarf galaxies; Pustil’nik et al. (1995) and Lindner et al. (1996) looked at blue compact galaxies (BCG); Salzer et al. (1990) separated their sample between high and low luminosity galaxies (with a limit at $`M_B=18`$), and Bothun et al. (1993) looked for low surface brightness galaxies (LSB). In his unsuccessful quest for a possible void population in the *ORS,* P01 considered dwarfs/irregulars and LSBs, computing the distribution of distance from these objects to their nearest neighbour $`L_{}`$ spiral.

To evaluate how biases arise in our simulations we will first study the environments of dark haloes as a function of their mass, and evaluate how their well-known clustering bias (e.g. Mo & White 1996) is echoed in the statistics that we later apply to our galaxy populations.

Then, using the photometric and morphological information provided by the simulation, we study galaxy environments as a function of luminosity, morphology, and colour. For example, we will compare the environments of faint galaxies to those of bright ones. To make contact with P01, we also analyze the nearest neighbour statistics of our various halo and galaxy samples by looking for the nearest neighbour of each test object among a set of reference $`L_{}`$ spirals.

### 3.1 Reference galaxies

These galaxies will be used as standard objects defining the clustering of “typical” galaxies, in particular for our nearest neighbour statistics. We select bright spirals within one magnitude of $`M_{B,}20.8`$ (taken here as the typical magnitude of a Milky Way look-alike): $`21.8<M_B<19.8`$, and with Sa/Sb/Sc morphological type: $`1<M_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{bulge}}M_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{total}}<2.2`$ (Simien & de Vaucouleurs 1986; de Vaucouleurs et al. 1991). This criterion is similar to the one used in the construction of the Tully-Fisher relations in M01, but includes Sa galaxies as well. We do *not* require that these reference galaxies be the central galaxies of their haloes however: they may also be satellites orbiting in large clusters. We found 1471 such galaxies in the whole simulation, an abundance very close ($`7\times 10^4h^3\mathrm{Mpc}^3\text{)}`$ to the value used by P01 for the spiral galaxies in his analysis of the distribution of a population of LSB galaxies at distances $`6000cz9000\text{km s}\text{-1}\text{.}`$

The bottom right panel of Fig. 1 shows these reference galaxies in a slice of side-length $`180h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ encompassing the supergalactic plane. Even with our applied morphological criterion, although the *rms* spread in the colors of the reference galaxies is small, there are still some red galaxies. This is not unexpected, however; most of these objects are “anemic” spirals in clusters. In the following, we will refer to this sample of reference galaxies as $`Ref`$.

### 3.2 DM haloes

We construct a series of dark matter halo samples binned according to their total mass (taken here to be the number of particles linked by the *FOF* algorithm). We define our mass bins to span a factor 4, with the “smallest bin” having \[10 40\] particles per halo and the largest \[40960 163840\] particles (there are only 38 haloes in this last bin, and only 5 haloes with more than 163840 particles). We call the 7 resulting samples $`HM_1`$ to $`HM_7`$ (Halo Mass) from the lightest to the heaviest. The *lower* limits (in particle number and mass) for each of the 7 bins are given in the first 7 columns of the first two lines of Table 1, while the last column gives the *upper* limit of the most massive bin, $`HM_7`$. The third line gives the number of haloes in each bin.

### 3.3 Luminosity selection

We define a series of luminosity bins to bring out the trends in the spatial distribution of objects as one goes from bright galaxies down to dwarfs. Our most luminous bin (which contains only 29 galaxies) has $`M_B<22.5`$ and subsequent bins span one magnitude to a lower limit of $`M_B=16.5`$, close to the resolution limit. This results in 7 bins labelled $`GL_1`$ to $`GL_7`$ (Galaxy Luminosity) from the faintest to the brightest. The limits of the luminosity bins, and corresponding number of objects, are given in the fourth and fifth lines of Table 1.

### 3.4 Colour selection

From figure 7 of M01, we can infer that $`BV0.8`$ splits galaxies brighter than the morphological resolution roughly into ellipticals and spirals. However, this split is not perfect, as noted above for the reference galaxies. Moreover, since we want to highlight a progressive change in the spatial distribution of galaxies with a given property, we will proceed as in the previous paragraph. We split the range covered by the $`BV`$ index of all galaxies above the luminosity resolution limit of the simulation ($`0<BV<1.42`$ 111$`BV1.4`$ is the maximum reached in our simulation: although stars are assumed to always form with solar metallicity and a Scalo IMF, the approximate model for dust reddening that we subsequently apply to the mock galaxy catalogs yields a few galaxies that are very red) in a series of 7 bins called $`GC_1`$ to $`GC_7`$ (Galaxy Colour), from the bluest to the reddest. The bluest bin is \[0 0.5\], and the following bin thresholds are separated by 0.1 in $`BV`$. The last bin covers the range \[1 1.5\]. Again, the limits of the bins, and number of objects, are given in the sixth and seventh lines of Table 1.

We stress that we have binned up all galaxies above the luminosity resolution limit of our simulation. This allows us to go substantially fainter than if we restricted ourselves to galaxies for which the simulation gives reliable morphologies.

### 3.5 Morphology selection

Our last sample selection makes use of the morphogical information in the simulation. By definition, we need here to restrict ourselves to the galaxies brighter than the morphology resolution limit ($`M_B18.46`$). The sample selection is done according to $`M_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{bulge}}M_{\mathrm{B},\mathrm{total}}`$ (which ranges from 0 to $`7`$ among the simulated galaxies which possess a bulge). The bins are called $`GM_1`$ to $`GM_7`$ (Galaxy Morphology) from the least bulge-dominated to the most bulge-dominated. Note that for simplicity, we have put bulge-less galaxies (above the morphology resolution) together with the objects in the first bin. The last two lines of Table 1 give the limits of these “morphology” bins, together with the associated number of objects.

## 4 The environments of the galaxy populations

To compare the local environments of the various samples, and to look for a possible simple signature of a void population, we first compute the mass density (by smoothing the DM field) of the region surrounding each galaxy, and we compare the distributions of this local density in our various samples. In addition, we estimate the luminosity function (per unit mass) of objects lying in environments of given density, focussing particularly on the variation of the overall shape.

### 4.1 Density of the environments

#### 4.1.1 Method

We characterize the environments of the galaxies by mass densities smoothed over a 5 $`h^1`$ Mpc smoothing scale (a smoothing of 10 $`h^1`$ Mpc is already too large to bring out any trends between the samples).

We assign the DM distribution of the simulation on a fine regular grid with mesh spacing much smaller than one smoothing length ($`R_s`$), using a CIC scheme. The smoothing of the density field is performed on this fine grid by means of a Gaussian kernel which takes the form:

$$W(r)=\frac{1}{(2\pi R_s^2)^{3/2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{r^2}{2R_s^2}\right)$$
(1)
where we take $`R_s=5h^1\text{ Mpc.}`$ Because we expect to study preferentially large voids with a diameter of $`10h^1\text{ Mpc,}`$ this scale seems appropriate.

Note that because we have only followed galaxy formation in the central, roughly spherical, high-resolution region of simulation (with radius $`8000\text{km s}\text{-1}\text{),}`$ we also use a shell of low-resolution particles immediately beyond to get the correct estimate of the DM density at mesh points near the boundary. Once we have sampled the smoothed DM field, we then simply interpolate the overdensities computed on the grid to the positions of the DM haloes (given by their most bound particle) or of the galaxies.

We consider then the normalized cumulative counts of the number of galaxies (the population fraction) above a given mass overdensity threshold, as a function of decreasing overdensity, starting from $`\delta _s>30`$ the maximum we find for the $`5h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ smoothing length we use. If the galaxies of some test population reside preferentially in low-density environments, this will appear as a late rise of the cumulative fraction with decreasing DM overdensity, compared, for instance, to the behaviour of the reference galaxies.

By construction, the cumulative plots obtained from the galaxy positions are mass- rather than volume-weighted. The visual impression from the pictures of K99 recalled by P01 is one of very few simulated galaxies in the voids, with the latter filling a substantial fraction of space. A simple way to assess the departure of the distribution of galaxies from a homogenous one with the tools of this Section is to use the regular mesh from which we have interpolated the DM density to the galaxy positions. In the four plots of Fig 2, the repeated dotted line gives the cumulative fraction of mesh points above a given smoothed DM overdensity threshold: it should be viewed as the simulation volume fraction above the threshold. We will denote this “mesh sample” with $`V`$, and note that half of the simulation volume has a DM environment density of $`\delta _s`$ below -0.24 and only about a third of it has higher than average density.

In the same four plots, we also repeat the cumulative fraction of the reference galaxies with a solid line. This line is very close to that we find for the DM particles themselves (thus for the “mass” in the simulation) and is a translation by almost a factor 2 towards higher density from the $`V`$ cumulative fraction: each population fraction is reached in the $`Ref`$ sample at twice the DM density needed to reach the same fraction for the uniformly distributed $`V`$ population.

#### 4.1.2 Results for mass and luminosity splitting

In the top left panel of Fig. 2 we show with dashed lines the normalized cumulative counts of the halo samples selected by mass ($`HM_i`$). In each of the four plots of Fig. 2 that we discuss here, the lowest and highest sample indices ($`i=1`$ and $`i=7`$) correspond to the leftmost and rightmost dashed curves, respectively, with a monotonic variation for the samples in between.

The first three halo samples $`HM_1`$ to $`HM_3`$ contain haloes with *total* masses $`M_{\mathrm{tot}}<M_{}`$, where as usual we define $`M_{}`$ such that $`\sigma (M_{})=\delta _{\mathrm{crit}}1.69`$ ($`M_{}1.44\times 10^{13}M_{}`$ here). The behaviours of the fractions of cumulative counts for these three halo samples are very similar: at overdensities under $`\delta _\mathrm{s}0.6`$ they depart slightly from the counts of the $`Ref`$ sample, favoring lower density environments. However, the plots are still far from the cumulative fraction for the grid counts; the population of haloes is 90% complete for $`\delta _\mathrm{s}0.3`$, while a third of the simulation volume is at such low densities.

While the plot of $`HM_4`$ almost coincides with the $`Ref`$ cumulative fraction (88% of the $`Ref`$ galaxies are central galaxies of haloes, and 53% of them are central galaxies of $`HM_4`$ haloes), the three most massive halo bins separate strongly from each other and from the $`Ref`$ fraction. This is a clear effect of the non-linearity of halo bias: according to the model of Mo & White (1996), one writes:

$$b_{\mathrm{halos}}(\nu )=1+\frac{\nu ^21}{\delta _{\mathrm{crit}}},$$
(2)
where $`\nu =\delta _{\mathrm{crit}}/\sigma (M)`$. Haloes less massive than $`M_{}`$ are antibiased, haloes close to $`M_{}`$ like $`HM_4`$ are unbiased, and the bias becomes more and more substantial as one further increases the mass. Haloes of the most massive sample completely avoid low and mean density regions (recall also that the particles of a given halo contribute to the smoothed DM density estimation of the region it resides in). In particular, there are no haloes in the $`HM_7`$ sample lying in environments with $`\delta _\mathrm{s}1.5`$.

The top right panel of Fig. 2 shows the cumulative fraction of the galaxy samples binned by their luminosity ($`GL_i`$). The trends are similar to those of the halo samples selected by their total DM mass, but except for the most luminous sample, the range of variation of galaxy bias is much reduced. Of course this is due to the fact that there is no tight relation between a halo mass and the luminosity of its central galaxy, and that a given galaxy luminosity sample has contributions from several differing halo samples. An example of this dilution is the cumulative fraction of the counts of the first four galaxy samples, which are very similar, and are very close to the $`Ref`$ sample. The range of $`B`$-band luminosities of the $`Ref`$ sample encompasses those of the $`GL_4`$ and $`GL_5`$ samples together. The further match with the $`GL_1`$ to $`GL_3`$ samples shows that the population of faint galaxies (i.e. taken globally in the samples and selected solely by luminosity) does not constitute a void population. $`GL_4`$ and $`GL_5`$ galaxies increasingly tend to avoid underdense regions ($`\delta _\mathrm{s}0`$) where a few $`Ref`$ galaxies are found. The most luminous bin, $`GL_7`$, with only 29 galaxies, contains of course a fair fraction of galaxies in very dense environments (BCGs in regions with $`\delta _\mathrm{s}10`$). However, as compared to $`HM_7`$, there *are* also very bright galaxies in the $`B`$-band in mean density regions: these are galaxies which have undergone a recent merger and are currently starbursting: among the 7 galaxies of the $`GL_7`$ sample with $`\delta _\mathrm{s}0.5`$, 5 have a colour index $`BV0.5`$ and $`M_B23`$. Again, this underlines the difficulty in relating halo mass to central galaxy luminosity.

Recall that the small amount of (anti-)bias found when considering faint luminosities or galaxies close to $`L_{}`$ and the rather limited positive bias for galaxies somewhat brighter (when not extremely bright, though) is consistent with that found in the figure 14 of K99 and with the correlation functions given below.

#### 4.1.3 Results for colour and morphology splitting

The bottom left panel of Fig. 2 plots the fraction of galaxies as a function of environment density among the colour samples ($`GC_i`$). Again, the different samples are differently biased with respect to the $`Ref`$ sample. Note, however, that a fair fraction of the galaxies in the two bluest samples populate regions more underdense than any of the other galaxy samples considered here: the curves of $`GC_1`$ and $`GC_2`$ are close to each other and rise later than that of the $`Ref`$ sample (the $`HM_1`$ halo sample also “favours” such underdense regions as compared to the usual trends). 10% of the $`Ref`$ population lies in environments with densities $`\delta _\mathrm{s}0.37`$ while 10% of the $`GC_1`$ population lies at $`\delta _\mathrm{s}0.5`$. Of course, this is still substantially denser than the corresponding density threshold for the $`V`$ sample: such blue galaxies do not make a homogeneous galaxy population on their own, but they nevertheless constitute the most promising “void fillers”. For increasingly redder populations, a preference for denser environments develops, but even in the reddest sample, there is a small fraction of the population in underdense regions, quite similarly to the $`GL_7`$ sample. The fraction of the reddest galaxies in very dense regions ($`\delta _\mathrm{s}10`$) is of order of 15% and smaller than the 30% fraction for the $`GL_7`$ sample (recall also that there are 8434 galaxies in $`GC_7`$, and only 29 in $`GL_7`$). Leaving aside $`GL_7`$, one concludes that the variation of bias is stronger among colour selected samples than among luminosity selected samples.

The bottom right plot of Fig. 2 deals with our morphology selected populations ($`GM_i`$). The five samples with later type galaxies show plots of cumulative fractions quite close to those of the reference spirals. Bias with respect to the $`Ref`$ sample, favouring denser galaxy environment, is visible for the two bulge dominated samples. Yet, the preference towards higher densities for extreme $`GM_7`$ galaxies is weaker than in our other extreme samples.

To conclude, none of our $`GM_i`$ populations has galaxies filling low density regions. Note that the morphology–density relation that we have implicitly constructed is limited to objects with luminosities *above* the morphology resolution at $`M_B18.5`$. This might partly explains why we found the $`GC_1`$ galaxies (down to the luminosity resolution) to reside on average in lower density regions than the $`GM_1`$ galaxies. Low mass haloes with less than 100 particles are generally not expected to host galaxies with $`M_B<18.5`$, simply because they are not massive enough. Then, one can easily understand why any sample constructed by splitting the $`M_B<18.5`$ galaxy population will not show a curve of cumulative counts below that say, of the $`HM_3`$ halo sample.

### 4.2 Luminosity functions

The previous section has shown that the typical environment (when smoothed on a $`5h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ scale) of the galaxies varies only slowly with their luminosities. Conversely, one can look for the distribution of galaxy luminosities as a function of the surrounding DM overdensity. Because a given Eulerian volume corresponds to different mean DM densities and different mean number of galaxies, when we probe different environments, we split our discussion of the luminosity functions (LF) in two series of five adjacent DM environment density bins. The first series (called $`LFV_i`$) is set so as to have the same simulation *volume* in each bin (hence probing 20% of the whole volume), and the second one (called $`LFM_i`$) to have the same *mass* in each bin (20% of the whole mass). In each of the two cases, we will express the luminosity function in units of counts per magnitude. Obviously with the appropriate *same* vertical shift of all LFs of the $`LFV_i`$ sample, we could get units of counts per magnitude per unit volume, and with another *same* shift for all LFs of the $`LFM_i`$ sample, we could get units of counts per magnitude per unit DM mass. In the first line of Table 2 we give the five lower limits for the DM environment density bins (the upper limit of the last bin is left open), for the $`LFV_i`$ and $`LFM_i`$ samples (left and right columns respectively). In the second and third lines of the table, we give the corresponding minimum $`B`$-band magnitude in each bin, and the number of contributing galaxies.

Here, we are mostly interested in the variation of the shape and normalization of the luminosity function with environment. For instance, if faint dwarf galaxies are to avoid high-density regions and to populate preferentially the voids (for a given enclosed DM mass), one would expect a steeper slope in lower density regions. The environments are again characterized by the DM overdensity smoothed with a gaussian kernel of dispersion $`5h^1\text{ Mpc.}`$

The left and right panels of Fig. 3 give the series of $`B`$-band LFs, for the $`LFV_i`$ and $`LFM_i`$ samples respectively. The tags at the bright ends of the functions label the id’s of the different environments (first line of Table 2). The coding of the lines has been alternated for clarity.

These LFs call for several comments, dealing successively with the minimum magnitude reached by the selected galaxies, the normalisation of the overall LF, the exponential cutoff and the faint-end slope.

* The left panel of Fig. 3 shows how LFs computed for two most underdense bins in the $`LFV_i`$ sample do not reach as high luminosities as the LFs computed for higher density bins. The second line of Table 2 gives the minimum $`B`$-band magnitude of the galaxies in each bin. While they hardly reach $`M_B21`$ and $`M_B21.5`$ for $`\delta _\mathrm{s}<`$ -0.57 and -0.38 respectively, there are already bright galaxies with $`B`$-band luminosities characteristic of the BCGs of massive clusters ($`M_B23`$) in the third and fourth bins with $`0.38\delta _\mathrm{s}0.33`$, probing volumes with DM densities close to the mean. These brightest objects are typically undergoing a starburst associated with a major merger, which brighten up in the $`B`$-band . Recall that our adopted TF normalization means that, on average, a central spiral galaxy of a halo with $`V_{200}220\text{km s}\text{-1}`$ has $`M_B20.8`$. Of course, the last sample $`LFV_5`$ contains the BCGs of the most massive clusters, and as expected we find there the brightest galaxy ($`M_B23.6`$) of the whole simulation. The first four LFs of the $`LFM_i`$ bins given in the right panel of Fig. 3 have comparable maximum galaxy luminosities. The absence of segregation from the point of view of the luminosity of the brightest galaxies among the bins of this sample is only due to the modified density thresholds of $`LFM_i`$ compared to those of $`LFV_i`$: already $`LFM_1`$ probes smooth DM densities reaching high enough to include the starbursting galaxies mentioned above.
* Although the low density regions covered by $`LFV_1`$ constitute 20% of the simulation volume, they only contain 4% of the total mass. At the other extreme, the $`LFV_5`$ bin carries 57% of the total mass in quantitatively the same volume and naturally hosts a larger number of galaxies. This readily explains the difference in the overall normalization (counts of galaxies) of the LFs in the $`LFV_i`$ samples, as one goes from low density regions to high density ones. As expected, the LFs in the $`LFM_i`$ sample have quite similar normalizations (at $`M_B17`$): each bin contains a similar mass. Interestingly, even the first bin which is restricted to $`\delta _\mathrm{s}0.23`$ and which encompasses 55% of the simulation volume does not host a very different number of faint (say with $`16.5>M_B>17.5`$) galaxies per DM mass than does, e.g. $`LFM_3`$ which covers 13% of the volume. This argues against a strong luminosity–density relation at the faint end (at the simulation resolution) and seems to confirm that the faint galaxy population does not predominantly reside in voids.
* An “exponential” cutoff is visible for the samples $`LFV_3`$ and $`LFV_4`$ probing mean density environments. It is weaker for $`LFV_1`$ and $`LFV_2`$, simply because in “void” and underdense regions, the LFs do not reach bright enough luminosities where one would expect the cutoff. The most overdense sample $`LFV_5`$ shows a complicated behaviour, one can notice a possible cutoff at $`M_B21`$, beyond which the LF exhibits sort of an “inflexion point” at $`M_B`$-21.5 or -22. This presumably echoes the difficulties encountered by M01 in obtaining good-looking cluster luminosity functions at the bright end. Again due to the shift in maximum density thresholds towards higher densities for all $`LFM_i`$ bins compared to the $`LFV_i`$ sample, cutoffs at $`M_B21`$ make a clear feature of the first four samples of $`LFM_i`$. It is reassuring for the galaxy formation scheme that these “knees” break the LFs at very similar magnitudes. Again, the presence of a cutoff for $`LFM_5`$ is less obvious because of the rather uncertain modelling of the luminosity of the BCGs of massive clusters.
* Faint-end slope variation is visible in both samples, and is more striking in the case of $`LFM_i`$. Over the range \[-16.5 -19.5\], a rough estimation is $`\alpha 1.6`$ and $`\alpha 1.4`$ in the lowest and the highest density bins respectively. These estimations repeat for $`LFV_i`$. This steepening in the faint-end slope in underdense regions is due to the relative depletion of $`L_{}`$ galaxies in such environments when compared to mean density or overdense environments, while the counts of faint galaxies with $`M_B17`$ are similar in the two cases.

The above results assume that at the lowest luminosities considered, no major physical process has been neglected. In particular, the extrapolation to even fainter luminosities of the model for galaxy formation that has been used here is hazardous: for example, background UV radiation (Thoul & Weinberg 1996) must be included when computing the infall rate of the cold gas on haloes with small mass ($`V_{200}3050\text{km s}\text{-1}`$), which collapse late, after reionization. Similarly, reheating by SNe feedback could very well expell a large fraction of the cold gas from the smallest haloes and suppress subsequent star formation there. Note also, as discussed at length in M01, that the overall luminosity function of the model analyzed here is a relatively poor fit to that observed. The results of this Section should thus be taken as indicating the expected trends in cutoff luminosities and faint-end slopes rather than their specific values.

## 5 Clustering of the galaxy populations

In this Section, we consider “two-point” statistics: first we check the correlation functions (in real space) of our samples. We recover the usual results, and underline the particularly low clustering of the “blue” sample with respect to the underlying DM, the latter being at the level of the reference spiral population. We then use nearest neighbour statistics to gain better insight into the relative spatial distribution of the reference galaxies and the various test populations.

### 5.1 Correlation functions

In both panels of Fig. 4, we reproduce the real-space autocorrelation functions of the DM (upper solid line), together with the autocorrelation functions of our reference galaxies (dash-dotted line). In the left panel, we show the correlations of the $`HM_1`$ and $`HM_5`$ samples (dotted lines, with $`HM_1`$ having the lowest amplitude on large scales), and the correlations of the $`GL_1`$ and $`GL_5`$ samples (dashed lines, with $`GL_1`$ having the lowest amplitude on large scales). In the right panel, we give the correlations of the $`GC_1`$ and $`GC_7`$ samples (dotted lines, with $`GC_1`$ below the solid line) and the correlations of the $`GM_1`$ and $`GM_7`$ samples (dashed lines, with $`GM_1`$ below the solid line). Note that we show the correlations of $`HM_5`$ and $`GL_5`$ instead of $`HM_7`$ and $`GL_7`$ simply because of the small number of objects in these last two samples, which results in too noisy correlation functions. The straight solid line in the lower left corner of each panel shows a -1.8 slope. All correlation functions have been computed from $`500h^1\text{ kpc}`$ to $`20h^1\text{ Mpc}`$. When interpreting these plots it is important to remember that the region simulated is quite small and is constrained to match the large-scale structure of the observed nearby galaxy distribution. As M01 show, the model autocorrelation functions of the various galaxy populations agree well with the observed functions for galaxies in the corresponding volume.

The logarithmic slope $`\gamma `$ of the autocorrelation of the dark matter is close to -1.8 . In the left panel, all samples, including $`Ref`$, have a shallower slope, closer to -1.4 . This value is also close to the slopes of both the $`GC_1`$ and $`GM_1`$ samples in the right panel. The other extreme samples, $`GC_7`$ and $`GM_7`$, have steeper correlation functions. The curves differ most noticeably, however, in amplitude (bias), even on large scales ($`20h^1\text{ Mpc}`$). Note that the steeper slope of $`GC_7`$ compared to, e.g., $`GC_1`$ is a consequence of the colour bias being stronger at smaller scales, as is evident in the observational sample of Willmer et al. (1998).

In the left panel of Fig. 4, it is striking how the autocorrelation of $`HM_1`$ matches that of the reference spirals, on scales greater than $`2h^1\text{ Mpc.}`$ The autocorrelation of $`GL_1`$ also approaches the correlation of the $`Ref`$ sample on these scales, but it is somewhat stronger. On smaller scales, the $`GL_1`$ sample is more correlated than both $`HM_1`$ and $`Ref`$. On the other hand, the autocorrelations of $`GL_5`$ and $`HM_5`$ are very similar on all scales shown. The reason might be that 88% of the galaxies of the $`GL_5`$ are central galaxies of haloes, and 82% of them belong to $`HM_4`$ or $`HM_5`$ haloes.

Note that the bias between $`GL_1`$ and $`GL_5`$ is apparent on scales greater than $`4h^1\text{ Mpc,}`$ beyond which it stays constant at a level of 1.2 to 1.3. A similar behaviour for the halo bias is seen between $`HM_1`$ and $`HM_5`$. Such a low level of respective bias is surprising given the rather different masses in the two samples: from equation 2, one would expect $`b_1=0.53`$ and $`b_5=1.14`$ and so $`b_{51}=2.15`$, using the mean masses of the haloes in each sample, but note that the more accurate formula of Jing (1998) predicts somewhat smaller effects in the sub-$`M_{}`$ range ($`b_{51}1.7`$). We have also already seen that the moderate amount of galaxy bias does not contradict the one given in the top left plot of figure 14 of K99 (although for brighter galaxies).

Finally, the correlation of the reference galaxies is notably antibiased with respect to the DM on small scales ($`<3h^1\text{ Mpc}`$). On larger scales, the antibias reaches an almost constant value of $`1.2`$. Again, this antibias of the late-type, star-forming galaxies was also noticed by K99.

As shown in the right panel of Fig. 4, the bias between $`GC_1`$ and $`GC_7`$ and between $`GM_1`$ and $`GM_7`$ is much stronger than between $`GL_1`$ and $`GL_5`$ for instance. As for the left-hand plot, the correlation functions of the first samples $`GC_1`$ and $`GM_1`$ match very well the autocorrelation of the reference galaxies. We therefore stress that the correlation of the bluest galaxies is *not* much weaker than that of the reference spirals. The correlation of the elliptical galaxies ($`GM_7`$) parallels that of the DM with a strong constant bias of $`1.6`$ with respect to the matter. Consistently with the analysis of K99, the colour bias is even higher than the morphology bias, but varies significantly with scale, from $`b>3`$ on small scales of order $`2h^1\text{ Mpc,}`$ until it reaches the smaller bias of the elliptical galaxies at $`15h^1\text{ Mpc}`$. This is can be explained by the contribution of faint, very red, satellite galaxies in massive haloes which increases the correlation function on small scales, while the morphology luminosity limit applied in the elliptical sample $`GM_7`$ suppresses such contribution.

This discussion of autocorrelation functions should be viewed as a mere check that we recover the usual trends among the samples. As stressed by P01, it is not possible to infer the relative spatial distribution of the populations on the basis of their correlation functions alone.

### 5.2 Nearest Neighbour Statistics

#### 5.2.1 Method

The nearest neighbour analysis compares the cumulative distribution of the distances $`D_{to}`$ to the nearest “ordinary” neighbour from galaxies in a test sample (for example, irregulars) to the cumulative distribution of the distances $`D_{oo}`$ from an ordinary galaxy to the nearest other ordinary galaxy. If an extended tail appears in the distribution of $`D_{to}`$ compared to $`D_{oo}`$, the spatial distributions of ordinary and test galaxies differ. In this case, if ordinary galaxies define large voids, test galaxies will tend to populate them. The reader is redirected to P01 for more details.

Here, given the number density of the galaxies in our samples and the probable maximum radius of the voids in the simulation, we expect that both the maximum distance of a t-galaxy to its nearest o-galaxy and the maximum distance of an o-galaxy to its nearest o-galaxy will be of order 15 $`h^1`$ Mpc. As a result, we limit the centers (t and o) to the innermost 65 $`h^1`$ Mpc around the MW (the high-resolution zone of the simulation has a radius of $`80h^1\text{ Mpc}`$). To avoid possible complications due to peculiar velocities of galaxies, we compute nearest neighbour statistics in real space. Although P01 carries out his whole analysis in redshift space, we have checked that the induced difference is negligible for the points we want to make.

To assess the significance of our results (and again following P01), we also randomize in the whole simulation volume the positions of one third of the galaxies in each test sample, and recompute $`D_{to}`$. This shows the effect of having at least *one third* of the test population *homogeneously* distributed. In the following, we consider this level as our lower “detection” limit for finding a void population. This procedure is clearly somewhat arbitrary but allows direct comparison with P01.

#### 5.2.2 Results

Fig. 5 gives the nearest neighbour statistics for each of our four sets of samples (see labels). In each case, the cumulative fraction of the distance from a reference galaxy to its nearest reference galaxy ($`D_{oo}`$) is shown by the solid line (the same in all the plots in this Section). The cumulative fraction of the distance from a test galaxy of the various samples to its nearest reference galaxy ($`D_{to}`$) is given by the dashed lines. In all cases, the rightmost dashed curve corresponds to index 1 of the samples, the leftmost dashed curve to index 7, and the indices increase monotonically in between. To show the level of a homogeneous population, we spanned the innermost $`65h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ of the simulation with a regular mesh with cell size $`5h^1\text{ Mpc,}`$ resulting in $`10000`$ points. We chose this size to end up with approximately the same density as in our bluest sample of galaxies, $`GC_1`$. The cumulative fraction of such mesh points as a function of the distance to their nearest spiral neighbour is repeated with dots in the four panels of the Figure.

The Fig. 6 shows the cumulative fractions $`D_{to}`$ for the extreme bins (1 and 7) (as an exception, $`HM_6`$ in the right panel for reasons of noise) of each of our population samples, as computed initially (dashed lines) and after randomizing the positions of one third of the test galaxies through the whole simulation volume (dash-dotted lines). The cumulative fraction of the mesh points as a function of the distance to their nearest spiral neighbour is also shown with dots. Note, as expected, that we found the curves of the randomized objects of the intermediate samples always to lie between those of the randomized objects of the extreme samples, and so we do not plot them.

The signature of halo bias is well visible. The haloes of the least massive sample, $`HM_1`$, have farther nearest spiral galaxies than do the spiral galaxies themselves ($`D_{to}>D_{oo}`$): the rightmost dashed curve lies well above the solid curve. This holds for the next two samples too, but to a lesser extent. Hence, these small haloes are more broadly distributed than the reference spirals. The overall agreement of $`D_{to}`$ with $`D_{oo}`$ for $`HM_4`$ and for $`HM_5`$ ($`M_{200}M_{}`$) can be understood in the same way as in Fig. 2.

At separations greater than $`4h^1\text{ Mpc,}`$ the two most massive halo samples have nearest spiral neighbours which are on average much closer than those of the $`Ref`$ galaxies. Of course, such massive haloes are found almost exclusively in dense environments with more galaxies, and can also be in the process of accreting spirals from the field. Also recall that it is possible for haloes to find their nearest neighbour among their own galaxy population.

Only a fraction of the least massive haloes *could* be homogeneously distributed with respect to the spirals, but in the top left panel of Fig. 6, the dash-dotted line of the cumulative fraction of $`D_{to}`$ for the $`HM_1`$ sample after randomization of the positions is above the dashed line. Less than a third of the low mass haloes are homogeneously distributed. The difference between the dash-dotted and dashed line is much larger for the $`HM_6`$ haloes in the right panel, because they are more clustered, and the randomization thus has a proportionally greater effect.

The trend goes in the same direction, but is weaker, for the $`GL_i`$ samples of galaxies selected by luminosities. There is only limited difference in the distribution of these samples of galaxies with respect to the reference spirals. Position randomization acts in the same way as for the haloes, but the cumulative fraction of the partly randomized test objects is always the highest. Less than a third of even the faintest galaxies is homogeneously distributed.

The colour-selected, blue $`GC_1`$ sample would be the best candidate for a population filling the voids between spirals. However, after partly redistributing its population, the distance to the nearest spiral at a given fraction of the objects is still higher than for the initial $`GC_1`$ sample. Although the difference between true and randomized samples is somewhat weaker than in the previous cases, the conclusion for a homogeneous population is negative. Note that galaxies in $`GC_1`$ also have the highest average SFR per stellar mass (among all colour selected samples), and may be termed “active galaxies”. Conversely, the reddest sample has nearest spiral neighbours clearly closer than have the spirals themselves, consistent with the above results for massive clusters, and the fact that very red galaxies are mostly satellite galaxies of such systems.

The trends in nearest neighbour statistics for the morphologically selected samples ($`GM_i`$) are similar to the results obtained for colour selection, but with a somewhat lower amplitude.

A detailed comparison with the observational results presented in P01 is difficult both because the analysis there is carried out in redshift space and, more importantly, because the definition and completeness of the observational samples are difficult to quantify. The qualitative agreement is, however, quite good. The most broadly distributed subsamples in our simulation (e.g. $`GC_1`$, GL1 or $`GM_1`$) have nearest neighbour distributions which relate to those of the reference spirals in much the same way as P01 finds for his observed samples of dwarf and LSB galaxies. In addition, the change in the distributions caused by randomizing the positions of a third of the test galaxies, are similar in the simulated and observed samples. We conclude that the nearest neighbour statistics suggest that the behaviour of the observed and simulated populations with respect to voids are quite similar.

## 6 Conclusions

We have looked for signatures of voids in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM simulation of M01, which mimics the dark matter and galaxy distribution of the Local Universe up to 8000 km s-1. The simulation can resolve the morphology of an LMC-type galaxy and the luminosity of a dwarf elliptical. We have addressed the question, raised by P01, of whether numerical simulations of galaxy formation in the current standard picture predict objects in the observationally empty spaces defined by normal, $`L_{}`$ spirals.

We showed first that regions of size $`10h^1\text{ Mpc}`$ exist in the simulation which are devoid of even the smallest DM haloes we can resolve. We studied the distribution of galaxies as a function of luminosity, colour and morphology, and the halo distribution as a function of mass. We found that *none* of our samples fills in underdense DM environments. The faint-end slope of the “equal-mass” luminosity functions computed in regions of different densities shows some steepening as one goes to less dense regions: dwarfs are relatively more abundant than $`L_{}`$ galaxies in comparison with high density regions, but the overall variation of the shape of the LF is limited. Nearest neighbour statistics suggest that none of our simulated populations can be considered to fill in the voids defined by $`L_{}`$ spirals. This contrasts with the discussion of P01, who states that at z=0 there is still a significant fraction of the matter in regions between clusters and filaments in simulations of a flat, low-density universe. Down to its resolution limit, our scheme of galaxy formation qualitatively reproduces the observed galaxy populations around voids.

The present simple study can be expanded in two ways. First, one might derive a more quantitative comparison based, for instance, on the distribution of the sizes of the voids, which could be compared to the observations of Müller et al. (2000) or to the analytical model of Friedmann & Piran (2001). Second, one can go to higher resolution. However, with current computer capacities, simulations of the size of the one exploited here are already costly. Furthermore, a comprehensive reevaluation of the relative importance of the physical processes would be needed. For example, nearby ionizing sources at $`z3`$ or the general UV background may inhibit the formation of galaxies like the Fornax dwarf in a spatially modulated way.

## Acknowledgements

The simulations presented in this paper were carried out on the T3E supercomputer at the Computing Center of the Max-Planck-Society in Garching, Germany.

Simulated galaxy populations analysed here are publically available at
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/NumCos/CR/