The Phoenix Project: the dark side of rich Galaxy clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce the Phoenix Project, a set of Λ cold dark matter (CDM) simulations of the dark matter component of nine rich galaxy clusters. Each cluster is simulated at least at two different numerical resolutions. For eight of them, the highest resolution corresponds to ∼130 million particles within the virial radius, while for one this number is over one billion. We study the structure and substructure of these systems and contrast them with six galaxy-sized dark matter haloes from the Aquarius Project, simulated at comparable resolution. This comparison highlights the approximate mass invariance of CDM halo structure and substructure. We find little difference in the spherically averaged mass, pseudo-phase-space density and velocity anisotropy profiles of Aquarius and Phoenix haloes. When scaled to the virial properties of the host halo, the abundance and radial distribution of subhaloes are also very similar, despite the fact that Aquarius and Phoenix haloes differ by roughly three decades in virial mass. The most notable difference is that cluster haloes have been assembled more recently and are thus significantly less relaxed than galaxy haloes, which leads to decreased regularity, increased halo-to-halo scatter and sizable deviations from the mean trends. This accentuates the effects of the strong asphericity of individual clusters on surface density profiles, which may vary by up to a factor of 3 at a given radius, depending on projection. The high apparent concentration reported for some strong-lensing clusters might very well reflect these effects. A more recent assembly also explains why substructure in some Phoenix haloes is slightly more abundant than in Aquarius, especially in the inner regions. Resolved subhaloes nevertheless contribute only 11 ± 3 per cent of the virial mass in Phoenix clusters. Together, the Phoenix and Aquarius simulation series provide a detailed and comprehensive prediction of the CDM distribution in galaxies and clusters when the effects of baryons can be neglected.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".