The DECam Local Volume Exploration Survey: Overview and First Data Release

Drlica-Wagner, A.; Carlin, Jeffrey L.; Nidever, David L.; Ferguson, P. S.; Kuropatkin, N.; Adamów, M.; Cerny, W.; Choi, Yumi; Esteves, J.; Martı́nez-Vázquez, C. E.; Mau, S.; Miller, Amy E. Stevens; Mutlu-Pakdil, Burçin; Neilsen, Eric H.; Olsen, Knut; Pace, Andrew B.; Riley, A. H.; Sakowska, J. D.; Sand, David J.; Santana-Silva, L.; Tollerud, Erik; Tucker, D. L.; Vivas, A. K.; Zaborowski, E.; Zenteno, A.; Abbott, T. M. C.; Allam, S.; Bechtol, K.; Bell, Cameron P. M.; Bell, Eric F.; Bilaji, P.; Bom, Clécio R.; Carballo‐Bello, J. A.; Crnojević, Denija; Cioni, M. R. L.; Diaz-Ocampo, A.; Boer, T. J. L. de; Erkal, Denis; Gruendl, R. A.; Hernández-Lang, D.; Hughes, Allison; James, D. J.; Johnson, L. Clifton; Li, T. S.; Mao, Yao-Yuan; Martínez–Delgado, David; Massana, Pol; McNanna, M.; Morgan, R.; Nadler, Ethan O.; Noël, N. E. D.; Palmese, A.; Peter, Annika H. G.; Rykoff, E. S.; Sánchez, Javier; Shipp, Nora; Simon, Joshua D.; Smercina, Adam; Soares-Santos, M.; Stringfellow, Guy S.; Tavangar, Kiyan; Marel, Roeland P. van der; Walker, A. R.; Wechsler, Risa H.; Wu, John F.; Yanny, B.; Fitzpatrick, Michael J.; Huang, Lu; Jacques, Alice; Nikutta, Robert; Scott, A.; Lab, Astro Data

doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac079d

Cited by 68 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 243 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the 'bright' dSphs we use Gaia EDR3 G, G RP photometry. The DECam based catalogs include: the Dark Energy Survey (DES) DR2 (Abbott et al 2021), the Dark Energy Camera Legacy Survey (DECaLs) DR9 (Dey et al 2019), Survey of the MAgellanic Stellar History DR2 (Nidever et al 2021a), DECam Local Volume Exploration Survey DR1 (Drlica-Wagner et al 2021), and the NOIRLab Source Catalog (NSC) DR2 (Nidever et al 2021b).…”

Section: Photometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Proper Motions, Orbits, and Tidal Influences of Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies

Pace¹,

Erkal²,

Li³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We measure systemic proper motion of 52 dwarf spheroidal (dSph) satellite galaxies of the Milky Way (MW). We combine Gaia EDR3 astrometry with accurate photometry and utilize a probabilistic mixture model to determine the systemic proper motions and identify likely dSph members. For the 46 dSphs with literature line-of-sight velocities we compute orbits in both a MW and a combined MW + Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) potential and identify likely LMC satellites. For these orbits, we Monte Carlo sample over the observational uncertainties for each dSph as well as the uncertainties in the MW and LMC potentials. We explore orbital parameters and previously used diagnostics for probing the MW tidal influence on the dSph population. We find that signatures of tidal influence by the MW are easily seen by comparing a dSph's pericenter and its average density relative to the MW at its pericenter. dSphs with large ellipticity show a preference for their orbital direction to align with their major axis even if they do not have a small pericenter. We compare the radial orbital phase of our dSph sample to subhalos in MW-like N -body simulations and find that the distributions are similar and that there is not an excess of satellites near their pericenter. With future Gaia data releases, we find that the orbital precision of most dSphs will be limited by uncertainties in distance and/or the MW potential rather than proper motion precision. Finally, we provide our membership lists to enable community follow-up.

show abstract

Section: Photometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Proper Motions, Orbits, and Tidal Influences of Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies

Pace¹,

Erkal²,

Li³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years, numerous groups have started work on the formidable observational task of surveying the very low mass satellites of nearby (D  50 Mpc) massive hosts. Many groups have used deep, wide-field imaging or spectroscopic surveys to catalog candidate satellites around various hosts in the LV, including MW-mass hosts (e.g., Irwin et al 2009;Kim et al 2011;Sales et al 2013;Merritt et al 2014;Spencer et al 2014;Karachentsev et al 2015a;Bennet et al 2017Bennet et al , 2019Bennet et al , 2020Danieli et al 2017Danieli et al , 2020Park et al 2017Park et al , 2019Tanaka et al 2017;Kondapally et al 2018;Smercina et al 2018;Byun et al 2020;Davis et al 2021;Garling et al 2021;Mutlu-Pakdil et al 2022) and hosts of somewhat lower mass (Carlin et al 2016(Carlin et al , 2021Müller & Jerjen 2020;Drlica-Wagner et al 2021) and higher mass (Chiboucas et al 2009(Chiboucas et al , 2013Stierwalt et al 2009;Trentham & Tully 2009;Crnojević et al 2014Crnojević et al , 2016Crnojević et al , 2019Müller et al 2015Müller et al , 2017aMüller et al , 2018aMüller et al , 2019bSmercina et al 2017;Cohen et al 2018). Pushing to larger distances, deep surveys are starting to map the dwarf content of various galaxy groups (e.g., Greco et al 2018b;…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Exploration of Local VolumE Satellites (ELVES) Survey: A Nearly Volume-limited Sample of Nearby Dwarf Satellite Systems

Carlsten

Greene

Beaton

et al. 2022

ApJ

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the final sample of the Exploration of Local VolumE Satellites (ELVES) survey, a survey of the dwarf satellites of a nearly volume-limited sample of Milky Way (MW)−like hosts in the Local Volume. Hosts are selected simply via a cut in luminosity ( M K s < − 22.1 mag) and distance (D < 12 Mpc). We cataloged the satellites of 25 of the 31 such hosts, with another five taken from the literature. All hosts are surveyed out to at least 150 projected kpc ( ∼ R vir/2), with the majority surveyed to 300 kpc ( ∼ R vir). Satellites are detected using a consistent semiautomated algorithm specialized for low surface brightness dwarfs. As shown through extensive tests with injected galaxies, the catalogs are complete to M V ∼ −9 mag and μ 0,V ∼ 26.5 mag arcsec−2. Candidates are confirmed to be real satellites through distance measurements including redshift, tip of the red giant branch, and surface brightness fluctuations. Across all 30 surveyed hosts, there are 338 confirmed satellites with M V < −9 mag, with a further 106 candidates awaiting distance measurement. For the vast majority of these, we provide consistent multiband Sérsic photometry. We show that satellite abundance correlates with host mass, with the MW being quite typical among comparable systems, and that satellite quenched fraction rises steeply with decreasing satellite mass, mirroring the quenched fraction for the MW and M31. The ELVES survey represents a massive increase in the statistics of surveyed systems with known completeness, and the provided catalogs are a unique data set to explore various aspects of small-scale structure and dwarf galaxy evolution.

show abstract

“…Simulations also predict that the presence of the LMC system may amplify certain signatures of DM physics at late times [110], induces global responses in the Milky Way halo that may be sensitive to Cosmological Simulations for Dark Matter Physics DM properties [240], and impacts the interpretation of direct detection experiments [231]. In parallel, observational efforts to map out satellite galaxies and stellar streams in the vicinity of the Magellanic Clouds (e.g., [241]) and around LMC analogs (e.g., [242][243][244]) have recently intensified, creating new synergies between simulators and observers studying DM substructure on Galactic and sub-Galactic scales. These examples illustrate that the complexity of the DM distribution (particularly on small scales) in specific observed systems requires simulations to predict accurately, and that these predictions feed back into concrete observational strategies and synergies.…”

Section: Need #6: Provide Guidance To Observers About Promising New S...mentioning

confidence: 96%

Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier White Paper: Cosmological Simulations for Dark Matter Physics

Banerjee¹,

Boddy²,

Cyr-Racine³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past several decades, unexpected astronomical discoveries have been fueling a new wave of particle model building and are inspiring the next generation of ever-more-sophisticated simulations to reveal the nature of Dark Matter (DM). This coincides with the advent of new observing facilities coming online, including JWST, the Rubin Observatory, the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, and CMB-S4. The time is now to build a novel simulation program to interpret observations so that we can identify novel signatures of DM microphysics across a large dynamic range of length scales and cosmic time. This white paper identifies the key elements that are needed for such a simulation program. We identify areas of growth on both the particle theory side as well as the simulation algorithm and implementation side, so that we can robustly simulate the cosmic evolution of DM for well-motivated models. We recommend that simulations include a fully calibrated and well-tested treatment of baryonic physics, and that outputs should connect with observations in the space of observables. We identify the tools and methods currently available to make predictions and the path forward for building more of these tools. A strong cosmic DM simulation program is

show abstract

The DECam Local Volume Exploration Survey: Overview and First Data Release

Cited by 68 publications

References 243 publications

Proper Motions, Orbits, and Tidal Influences of Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies

Proper Motions, Orbits, and Tidal Influences of Milky Way Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies

The Exploration of Local VolumE Satellites (ELVES) Survey: A Nearly Volume-limited Sample of Nearby Dwarf Satellite Systems

Snowmass2021 Cosmic Frontier White Paper: Cosmological Simulations for Dark Matter Physics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About