1: % iaus2esa.tex -- sample pages for Proceedings IAU Colloquium document class

2: % (based on v1.0 cca2esam.tex)

3: % v1.0 released 26 March 2004 by TechBooks

4: % Copyright (2004) International Astronomical Union

5: 

6: \NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}

7: 

8: \documentclass{iaus}

9: \usepackage{graphics}

10: 

11:   \checkfont{eurm10}

12:   \iffontfound

13:     \IfFileExists{upmath.sty}

14:       {\typeout{^^JFound AMS Euler Roman fonts on the system,

15:                    using the 'upmath' package.^^J}%

16:        \usepackage{upmath}}

17:       {\typeout{^^JFound AMS Euler Roman fonts on the system, but you

18:                    dont seem to have the}%

19:        \typeout{'upmath' package installed. iaus.cls can take advantage

20:                  of these fonts,^^Jif you use 'upmath' package.^^J}%

21:        \providecommand\upi{\pi}%

22:       }

23:   \else

24:     \providecommand\upi{\pi}%

25:   \fi

26: 

27: % See if the author has AMS symbol fonts installed: If they have, attempt

28: % to use the 'amssymb' package to provide the AMS symbol characters.

29: 

30:   \checkfont{msam10}

31:   \iffontfound

32:     \IfFileExists{amssymb.sty}

33:       {\typeout{^^JFound AMS Symbol fonts on the system, using the

34:                 'amssymb' package.^^J}%

35:        \usepackage{amssymb}%

36:        \let\le=\leqslant  \let\leq=\leqslant

37:        \let\ge=\geqslant  \let\geq=\geqslant

38:       }{}

39:   \fi

40: 

41: % See if the author has the AMS 'amsbsy' package installed: If they have,

42: % use it to provide better bold math support (with \boldsymbol).

43: 

44:   \IfFileExists{amsbsy.sty}

45:     {\typeout{^^JFound the 'amsbsy' package on the system, using it.^^J}%

46:      \usepackage{amsbsy}}

47:     {\providecommand\boldsymbol[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $##1$}}}

48: 

49: %%% Example macros (some are not used in this sample file) %%%

50: 

51: % For units of measure

52: \newcommand\dynpercm{\nobreak\mbox{$\;$dynes\,cm$^{-1}$}}

53: \newcommand\cmpermin{\nobreak\mbox{$\;$cm\,min$^{-1}$}}

54: 

55: % Various bold symbols

56: \providecommand\bnabla{\boldsymbol{\nabla}}

57: \providecommand\bcdot{\boldsymbol{\cdot}}

58: \newcommand\biS{\boldsymbol{S}}

59: \newcommand\etb{\boldsymbol{\eta}}

60: 

61: \def\beq{\begin{equation}}

62: \def\eeq{\end{equation}}

63: \def\bey{\begin{eqnarray}}

64: \def\eey{\end{eqnarray}}

65: \def\pppm{\rm P^3M}

66: \def\mpc{\,h^{-1}{\rm {Mpc}}}

67: \def\mpci{\,h{\rm {Mpc}}^{-1}}

68: \def\kpc{\,h^{-1}{\rm {kpc}}}

69: \def\kms{\,{\rm {km\, s^{-1}}}}

70: \def\msun{{M_\odot}}

71: \def\br#1{{\mathbf r}_{#1}}

72: \def\bs#1{{\mathbf s}_{#1}}

73: \def\zetarr{\zeta(r_{12},r_{23},r_{31})}

74: \def\zetass{\zeta(s_{12},s_{23},s_{31})}

75: \def\scycl{(s_{12},s_{23},s_{31})}

76: \def\rpcycl{(r_{p12},r_{p23},r_{p31})}

77: \def\rppicycl{(r_{p12},r_{p23},r_{p31},\pi_{12},\pi_{13})}

78: \def\zetazrprp{\zeta_z(r_{p12},r_{p23},r_{p31},\pi_{12},\pi_{13})}

79: \def\zetaru{\zeta(r,u,v)}

80: \def\zetasu{\zeta(s,u,v)}

81: \def\zetazrpu{\zeta_z(r_{p12},u,v,\pi_{12},\pi_{13})}

82: \def\Qru{Q(r,u,v)}

83: \def\Qsu{Q_{red}(s,u,v)}

84: \def\Qzrpu{Q_z(r_{p12},u,v,\pi_{12},\pi_{13})}

85: \def\Qrpu{Q_{proj}(r_{p},u,v)}

86: \def\qtu{q(\theta,u,v)}

87: \def\Pirpu{\Pi(r_p,u,v)}

88: \def\nbar#1{{\bar n}({\mathbf r}_{#1})}

89: \def\nbas#1{{\bar n}({\mathbf s}_{#1})}

90: \def\xiz#1{\xi_z(r_{p#1},\pi_{#1})}

91: \def\xir#1{\xi(r_{#1})}

92: \def\xis#1{\xi(s_{#1})}

93: \def\wrp#1{w(r_{p#1})}

94: \def\mag{M_b - 5 logh}

95: 

96: \def\gs{\mathrel{\raise1.16pt\hbox{$>$}\kern-7.0pt

97: \lower3.06pt\hbox{{$\scriptstyle \sim$}}}}

98: \def\ls{\mathrel{\raise1.16pt\hbox{$<$}\kern-7.0pt

99: \lower3.06pt\hbox{{$\scriptstyle \sim$}}}}

100: % Symbols that drive mathematicians crazy: "greater than or on the order of"

101: % and its counterpart.

102: % To use, type "\simgt" or "\simlt".

103: \def\gtsima{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}

104: \def\ltsima{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}

105: \def\prosima{$\; \buildrel \propto \over \sim \;$}

106: \def\gsim{\lower.5ex\hbox{\gtsima}}

107: \def\lsim{\lower.5ex\hbox{\ltsima}}

108: \def\simgt{\lower.5ex\hbox{\gtsima}}

109: \def\simlt{\lower.5ex\hbox{\ltsima}}

110: \def\simpr{\lower.5ex\hbox{\prosima}}

111: \def\la{\lsim}

112: \def\ga{\gsim}

113:  

114: 

115: % For multiletter symbols

116: \newcommand\Real{\mbox{Re}} % cf plain TeX's \Re and Reynolds number

117: \newcommand\Imag{\mbox{Im}} % cf plain TeX's \Im

118: \newcommand\Rey{\mbox{\textit{Re}}}  % Reynolds number

119: \newcommand\Pran{\mbox{\textit{Pr}}} % Prandtl number, cf TeX's \Pr product

120: \newcommand\Pen{\mbox{\textit{Pe}}}  % Peclet number

121: \newcommand\Ai{\mbox{Ai}}            % Airy function

122: \newcommand\Bi{\mbox{Bi}}            % Airy function

123: 

124: % For sans serif characters:

125: % The following macros are setup in iaus.cls for sans-serif fonts in text

126: % and math.

127: %

128: % \textsfi, \mathsfi   : sans-serif slanted

129: % \textsfb, \mathsfb   : sans-serif bold

130: % \textsfbi, \mathsfbi : sans-serif bold slanted (doesnt exist in CM fonts)

131: %

132: % For san-serif roman use \textsf and \mathsf as normal.

133: %

134: \newcommand\ssC{\mathsf{C}}    % for sans serif C

135: \newcommand\sfsP{\mathsfi{P}}  % for sans serif sloping P

136: \newcommand\slsQ{\mathsfbi{Q}} % for sans serif bold-sloping Q

137: 

138: % Hat position

139: \newcommand\hatp{\skew3\hat{p}}      % p with hat

140: \newcommand\hatR{\skew3\hat{R}}      % R with hat

141: \newcommand\hatRR{\skew3\hat{\hatR}} % R with 2 hats

142: \newcommand\doubletildesigma{\skew2\tilde{\skew2\tilde{\Sigma}}}

143: %       italic Sigma with double tilde

144: 

145: % array strut to make delimiters come out right size both ends

146: \newsavebox{\astrutbox}

147: \sbox{\astrutbox}{\rule[-5pt]{0pt}{20pt}}

148: \newcommand{\astrut}{\usebox{\astrutbox}}

149: 

150: \newcommand\GaPQ{\ensuremath{G_a(P,Q)}}

151: \newcommand\GsPQ{\ensuremath{G_s(P,Q)}}

152: \newcommand\p{\ensuremath{\partial}}

153: \newcommand\tti{\ensuremath{\rightarrow\infty}}

154: \newcommand\kgd{\ensuremath{k\gamma d}}

155: \newcommand\shalf{\ensuremath{{\scriptstyle\frac{1}{2}}}}

156: \newcommand\sh{\ensuremath{^{\shalf}}}

157: \newcommand\smh{\ensuremath{^{-\shalf}}}

158: \newcommand\squart{\ensuremath{{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}}}

159: \newcommand\thalf{\ensuremath{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}}

160: \newcommand\Gat{\ensuremath{\widetilde{G_a}}}

161: \newcommand\ttz{\ensuremath{\rightarrow 0}}

162: \newcommand\ndq{\ensuremath{\frac{\mbox{$\partial$}}{\mbox{$\partial$} n_q}}}

163: \newcommand\sumjm{\ensuremath{\sum_{j=1}^{M}}}

164: \newcommand\pvi{\ensuremath{\int_0^{\infty}%

165:   \mskip -33mu-\quad}}

166: 

167: \newcommand\etal{\mbox{\textit{et al.}}}

168: \newcommand\etc{etc.\ }

169: \newcommand\eg{e.g.\ }

170: 

171: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

172: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}

173: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}

174: 

175: \title[Outskirts of Galaxy Clusters: intense life in the suburbs]

176:       {Velocity of galaxies with different luminosity}

177: 

178: \author[Y.P. Jing {\it et al.\/}]%

179: {Y.P. Jing$^1$ \and G. B\"orner$^2$}

180: 

181: \affiliation{$^1$Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, the Partner Group

182: of MPI f\"ur Astrophysik, \\Nandan Road 80, Shanghai 200030, China

183: email: ypjing@shao.ac.cn\\[\affilskip] 

184: $^2$ Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Astrophysik,

185: Karl-Schwarzschild-Strasse 1, \\ 85748 Garching, Germany email: grb@mpa-garching.mpg.de}

186: 

187: \pubyear{2004}

188: \volume{195}

189: \pagerange{1--8}

190: \date{?? and in revised form ??}

191: \setcounter{page}{1}

192: \jname{Outskirts of Galaxy Clusters: intense life in the suburbs}

193: \editors{A. Diaferio, ed.}

194: \begin{document}

195: 

196: \maketitle

197: 

198: \begin{abstract}

199: We present the first determination of the pairwise velocity dispersion

200: of galaxies at different luminosity with the final release of the

201: Two-Degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS). Our result

202: surprisingly shows that the random velocities of the faint galaxies

203: are very high, around $ 700 \kms$, reaching similar values as the

204: brightest galaxies. At intermediate luminosities slightly brighter

205: than the characteristic luminosity $M_\star$, the velocities exhibit a

206: well defined steep minimum near $ 400 \kms$. The result challenges the

207: current halo model of galaxies of Yang et al. that was obtained by

208: matching the clustering and luminosity function of 2dFGRS, and can be

209: an important constraint in general on theories of galaxy formation,

210: e.g., the semi-analytical model. Combining the observed luminosity

211: dependence of clustering, our result implies that quite a fraction of

212: faint galaxies are in massive halos of galaxy clusters as the

213: brightest ones, but most of the $M_\star$ galaxies are in galactic halos.

214: \end{abstract}

215: 

216: \firstsection % if your document starts with a section,

217:               % remove some space above using this command.

218: \section{Introduction}

219: 

220: 

221: The clustering of galaxies in the Universe is characterized by their

222: spatial positions, and their peculiar velocities which lead to

223: deviations of their motion from the pure Hubble flow.  The big

224: redshift surveys assembled in recent years by the diligent work of

225: many astronomers give angular positions and redshifts for large

226: numbers of galaxies. A rough 3D map can be obtained by placing the

227: galaxies at distances along the line of sight derived via Hubble's law

228: from their redshifts. The peculiar velocity, however, also contributes

229: to the redshift, and this leads to a misplacement of the galaxy away

230: from its true location.  The local gravitational field is the cause of

231: the peculiar motion.  and thus the redshift distortion in the galaxy

232: maps can give information on the underlying matter distribution.

233: 

234: The amplitude of the distortions can be estimated from the pair

235: distribution of galaxies.  For pairs of galaxies at distances much larger than

236: their separation, one can use a plane-parallel approximation, and

237: write for the power spectrum in redshift space,

238: \begin{equation}

239: P^{S} ({k, \mu})=P(k)\frac{(1+\beta

240:   \mu^2)^2}{1+\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_v(k)k\mu)^2}\,.

241: \label{fitting} 

242: \end{equation}

243: Here $\mu$ is the cosine of the angle between the wave vector and the

244: line of sight. The linear redshift distortion parameter $\beta$ is

245: related to the linear growth factor $f(\Omega_M) \simeq \Omega^{0.6}$

246: ($\Omega_M$ is the matter density), and the bias $b$ of the density

247: fluctuation spectrum via $\beta = \Omega_M^{0.6}/b$. P(k) is the power

248: spectrum in real space. The pairwise velocity dispersion (PVD)

249: $\sigma_v(k)$ describes the virial motion of galaxies in dense

250: systems, i.e. the Finger-of-God effect. As shown by Jing \& B\"orner

251: (2001), the redshift power spectrum of dark matter and its biased

252: tracers can be accurately described by Eq.(\ref{fitting}). Applying

253: this model to an observation of $P^S(k, \mu)$ may therefore yield a

254: determination of the three quantities $P(k)$, $\beta$, and

255: $\sigma_{v}(k)$, all of which are useful observables for testing

256: galaxy formation models

257: 

258: 

259: Here we use the final release of the 2dFGRS (

260: {\verb=http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/2dFGRS=}) to measure $P^{S} (k, \mu)$

261: and the PVD $\sigma_v(k)$ of galaxies. Since we are interested in the PVD

262: at small scale, we fix $\beta$ at a reasonable value of $ 0.45$

263: (Peacock et al. 2001).  The 2dF catalog has already been analyzed

264: statistically with respect to the PVD (Hawkins et al 2003), but here

265: we use a novel method to estimate the PVD. Furthermore, we take

266: advantage of the large number of galaxies in the 2dF catalog to bin

267: the galaxies in different luminosity intervals, and to make the first

268: study of the luminosity dependence of the PVD. This was not possible

269: up to now, and we shall see that remarkable tests of the galaxy

270: formation models become possible with the luminosity dependence of

271: the PVD.  The luminosity dependence of the clustering (the two-point

272: correlation function) of galaxies in the 2dFGRS has been

273: investigated (Norberg et al. 2002a), but not of the PVD.

274: 

275: \section{Statistical Analysis}

276: 

277: In order to study the luminosity dependence of the PVD, we divide the

278: galaxies into 11 subsamples according to their absolute

279: luminosity. The subsamples are successively brightened by 0.5

280: magnitude from the faintest sample $M_b=-17.0+5\log h$ to

281: $M_b=-22.0+5\log h$, with successive subsamples overlapping by 0.5

282: magnitude. Here $h$ is the Hubble constant in units of $100\kms{\rm

283: Mpc}^{-1}$.  For computing the absolute magnitude, we have used the

284: k-correction and luminosity evolution model of Norberg (2002b; ${\rm

285: k+e}$ model);, i.e., the absolute magnitude is in the rest frame $b_j$

286: band at $z=0$. We assume a cosmological model with the density

287: parameter $\Omega_0=0.3$ and the cosmological constant $\lambda_0=0.7$

288: throughout this paper.

289: 

290: We measure the redshift two-point correlation functions $\xi_z({\bf

291: s})$ following the method of Jing, Mo, \& B\"orner(1998).  The random

292: samples for the clustering analysis are generated in the same way as

293: described in Jing \& B\"orner (2004a). Each random sample for a

294: northern or southern luminosity subsample contains 100,000 random

295: points.  We convert the $\xi_z({\bf s})$ to $P^S(k,\mu)$ by the

296: Fourier transformation. More details about our statistical method can

297: be found in our journal paper (Jing \& B\"orner 2004b).

298: 

299: 

300: \section{Results}

301: 

302: \begin{figure}

303: \centerline{\resizebox{!}{12cm}{\includegraphics{jingf1.ps}}}

304: %\center{\includegraphics[width=10cm]{fig5}}

305: 

306: \caption{The redshift space power spectrum $P(k,\mu)$ measured in

307: 2dFGRS. The symbols are for the whole survey, the dotted lines for the

308: south subsample, and the dashed lines for the north subsample. The

309: errors are plotted only for the whole survey, estimated with

310: the bootstrap method. The smooth solid lines are the best fits of

311: Eq.(\ref{fitting}) to data of the whole sample. (a) for $-17.5<

312: M_b-5\log h <-18.5$; (b) for $-18.5< M_b-5\log h <-19.5$; (c) for

313: $-19.5< M_b-5\log h <-20.5$; (d) for $-20.5< M_b-5\log h <-21.5$.  The

314: $k$ values in each panel are from $0.16\mpci$ (top) to $2.5\mpci$

315: (bottom). }

316: 

317: \end{figure}

318: 

319: \begin{figure}

320: \centerline{\resizebox{!}{12cm}{\includegraphics{jingf2.ps}}}

321: \caption{The pairwise velocity dispersion measured at $k=1\mpci$ in

322: the 2dFGRS (symbols for the whole sample, dotted line for the south,

323: and dashed line for the north), compared with the prediction based on

324: the halo model (thick solid line). The error bars of the observed

325: results are given by the mock samples. }

326: \label{fig:sigmavk1}\end{figure}

327: 

328: 

329: In Fig.1 the basic measurement of the power spectrum in redshift space

330: $P(k, \mu)$ is shown. The four panels in this figure correspond to

331: four different luminosity intervals from faint to bright galaxies.

332: The values of k range from $0.16\mpci$ at the top to $2.5\mpci$ at the

333: bottom with an interval $\Delta \log_{10}k=0.2$. The south and north

334: samples agree quite well with the full survey indicating that cosmic

335: variance is not a major problem.  The power spectrum for the larger

336: k-values decreases quite strongly with $\mu$, more than a factor of

337: $10$ between $\mu = 0$ and $\mu = 1$.  The solid lines are the best

338: fits obtained by applying equation (\ref{fitting}) to the data of the

339: whole survey, showing that the model (\ref{fitting}) can accurately

340: describe the observed redshift power spectrum of galaxies.

341: 

342: 

343: The luminosity dependence of the PVD is shown most clearly in Fig.2,

344: where we have plotted $\sigma_{v}$ at $ k= 1 \mpci $ for the 11

345: overlapping samples. The surprising result is a strong dependence on

346: luminosity with the bright and the faint galaxies reaching high values

347: of $ \simeq 700 \kms$ or more, and a well defined minimum of $ \simeq

348: 400 \kms$ for the galaxies of magnitude $M_b-5\log_{10} h =-20.5$. The

349: bright and the faint galaxies apparently have high random motions, as

350: expected for objects in massive halos or in clusters. The $M_\star$

351: like galaxies are rather moderate in their PVD, and probably reside in

352: galaxy size halos.

353: 

354: 

355: The thick solid line represents the prediction based on the up-to-date

356: halo model of Yang et al. (2003).  For the halo model, we adopt the

357: cosmological model that is a currently popular flat low-density model

358: with the density parameter $\Omega_0=0.3$ and the cosmological

359: constant $\lambda_0=0.7$ (LCDM). The shape parameter $\Gamma=\Omega_0

360: h$ and the amplitude $\sigma_8$ of the linear density power spectrum

361: are 0.2 and 0.9 respectively.  We use two sets of simulations, with

362: boxsizes $L=100\mpc$ and $L=300\mpc$, that were generated with our

363: vectorized-parallel $\pppm$ code (Jing \& Suto 2002) for this

364: model. Both simulations use $512^3$ particles, so the particle mass

365: $m_p$ is $6.2\times 10^8\msun$ and $1.7\times 10^{10}\msun$

366: respectively in these two cases.  We populate the halos with galaxies

367: in a similar way to that of Yang et al. (2004), but we used our own

368: code and adopted the model parameters of Model M1 in Yang et al. (2003).

369: The halo model, which matched nicely the luminosity function and the

370: luminosity dependence of clustering of galaxies in 2dFGRS (confirmed

371: by our analysis), clearly does not match our observation of the PVD.  The

372: failure of the halo model indicates that the prescription of how to

373: populate halos must be adapted better.

374: 

375: \section{Discussion}

376: The analysis of the velocity fields of the galaxies in the 2dFGRS has

377: led to a surprising discovery: The random velocities of the faint

378: galaxies are very high, around $ 700 \kms$, reaching similar values as

379: the bright galaxies. At intermediate luminosities the velocities

380: exhibit a well defined steep minimum near $ 400 \kms$.

381: 

382: It seems that the galaxies in different luminosity intervals appear as

383: different populations in their own right, defined by objective

384: statistics.  A look at figure 2 shows convincingly that this is

385: actually the case. For this figure we have sorted the galaxies in 11

386: luminosity bins, each one magnitude wide, from magnitude $-16.5$ to $

387: -22$ and plotted the value of $ \sigma_{v}$ at a wave number of $k

388: \simeq 1 \mpci$. Such a finely resolved binning of galaxies in samples

389: of different luminosities is possible for the 2dFGRS, because it is

390: big enough to contain sufficiently many galaxies in each luminosity

391: class.

392: 

393: The PVD is an indicator of the depth of the local gravitational

394: potential. Therefore we find the interesting result that the bright

395: and the faint galaxies move in the strongest gravitational field. They

396: are in clusters, while the galaxies around magnitude $-20$, the $M_*$

397: galaxies in the Schechter luminosity function, populate the field.

398: 

399: 

400: The bimodal nature of the correlation between the PVD and luminosity may

401: be used as a stringent test of galaxy formation models.  We have

402: investigated the halo occupation model (Yang et al. 2003) which has

403: been optimally fitted to reproduce the luminosity function, and the

404: two-point correlation function of the 2dFGRS. If we adapt this model

405: to the PVD value of the $M_*$ galaxies, we see that it cannot give the

406: high values found for the fainter galaxies. The PVD values of the

407: model actually run opposite to the data and the model assigns smaller

408: values to the fainter galaxies.  This must mean that the assignment of

409: galaxies to the dark matter halos must be done in a more intricate way

410: as up to now.  The number of faint galaxies in clusters must be

411: increased substantially to at least recover the high PVD found for

412: them.  Also, the low value of $ 400 \kms $ found for the galaxies with

413: magnitude $ -20.5$ must mean that these galaxies reside in dark matter

414: halos of galactic size, The halo population model must be fitted with

415: a much more complex scheme of assigning galaxies to halos, if the

416: results shown in figure 2 are to be reproduced,

417: 

418: Another way, widely used, to connect dark matter to galaxies is the

419: semianalytic modeling, where the dark matter distributions obtained

420: from N-body simulations are supplemented with some of the physical

421: processes important in galaxy formation using semianalytic techniques.

422: A test of the PVD vs luminosity for this type of models will be the

423: aim of a subsequent paper.

424: 

425: 

426: \begin{acknowledgments}

427: JYP would like to thank the Max-Planck Institute f\"ur Astrophysik for

428: its warm hospitality, IAU for its partial travel support, and the SOC

429: for adjusting the talk time. The work is supported in part by NKBRSF

430: (G19990754), by NSFC (No.10125314), and by the CAS-MPG exchange

431: program.

432: \end{acknowledgments}

433: 

434: \begin{thebibliography}{}

435: \bibitem[Hawkins et al.(2003)]{2003MNRAS.346...78H} Hawkins, E., et al.\ 

436: 2003, MNRAS, 346, 78 

437: \bibitem[Jing \& B{\" o}rner(2001)]{2001ApJ...547..545J} Jing, Y.~P.~\& 

438: B{\" o}rner, G.\ 2001, ApJ, 547, 545 

439: \bibitem[Jing \& B{\" o}rner(2004)]{} Jing, Y.~P.~\& 

440: B{\" o}rner, G.\ 2004a, ApJ (in press)/ astro-ph/0311585 

441: \bibitem[Jing \& B{\" o}rner(2004)]{} Jing, Y.~P.~\& 

442: B{\" o}rner, G.\ 2004b, in preparation 

443: \bibitem[Jing, Mo, \& B\"orner(1998)]{jmb98} Jing, Y.~P., Mo, H.~J., \& B\"orner, G.\ 1998, ApJ, 494, 1 

444: \bibitem[Jing \& Suto(2002)]{js02} Jing, Y.~P.~\& Suto, Y.\ 2002, ApJ, 574, 538 

445: \bibitem[Norberg et al.(2002a)]{norberg02a} Norberg, P.~et al.\ 2002a, MNRAS, 332, 827  %clustering vs L and eta

446: \bibitem[Norberg et al.(2002b)]{norberg02b} Norberg, P.~et al.\ 2002b, MNRAS, 336, 907 %LF and SF

447: \bibitem[Yang, et al.(2004)]{yang03b} Yang, X. et al. 2004, MNRAS (in press) /astro-ph/0303524

448: \bibitem[Yang, Mo, \& van den Bosch(2003a)]{yang03a} Yang, X., Mo, H.~J., \& van den Bosch, F.~C.\ 2003, MNRAS, 339, 1057

449: 

450: \bibitem[Peacock et al.(2001)]{2001Natur.410..169P} Peacock, J.~A., et al.\ 

451: 2001, Nature, 410, 169 

452: \end{thebibliography}

453:  

454: 

455: 

456: 

457: \end{document}

458: