pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.18708 · v1 · pith:TVF5CKWWnew · submitted 2026-06-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.GA

Dynamical evolution of dark matter subhaloes in the Milky Way: role of the Galactic disc

Junnan Shen , Go Ogiya , Jens St\"ucker This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 20:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GA
keywords dark matter subhaloesMilky WayGalactic disctidal strippingmass lossN-body simulationsinclination angleadiabatic shielding
0
0 comments X

The pith

Subhaloes on orbits tilted a few degrees to the Milky Way disc lose mass faster than exactly coplanar ones because quick disc crossings amplify tidal shocks.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper uses N-body simulations to show how the angle between a subhalo's orbit and the Galactic disc controls mass loss. Subhaloes inclined by only a few degrees cross the disc rapidly, which strengthens tidal shock heating and speeds up mass loss. Exactly coplanar orbits experience adiabatic shielding that reduces the energy from those shocks, slowing mass loss. As a result, subhaloes at distances of 0.3 to 2 kpc from the disc plane have lower dark matter densities and weaker signals, while those remaining inside the disc keep more mass and offer better prospects for indirect detection once baryonic contamination is subtracted. Structural evolution of the subhaloes still follows the same tidal tracks reported in earlier work despite the differing mass-loss rates.

Core claim

N-body simulations demonstrate that subhaloes whose orbits are inclined by only a few degrees with respect to the Galactic disc pass through it quickly, enhancing tidal shock heating and increasing mass-loss efficiency, while exactly coplanar orbits experience adiabatic shielding that suppresses energy input from tidal shocks and reduces mass-loss efficiency. Tidal stripping lowers dark matter density inside subhaloes and thereby weakens their annihilation signals, so subhaloes at 0.3-2 kpc from the disc plane are expected to emit only weak signals whereas those embedded in the disc remain more promising targets provided baryonic emission is carefully modeled and subtracted. Mass-loss histor

What carries the argument

Orbital inclination angle relative to the Galactic disc, which sets whether subhaloes experience rapid disc crossings that amplify tidal shocks or adiabatic shielding that damps shock energy input.

If this is right

  • Subhaloes located 0.3-2 kpc from the disc plane lose more mass and produce weaker dark matter annihilation signals.
  • Subhaloes that stay embedded inside the disc retain higher densities and remain better candidates for indirect detection after baryonic foregrounds are removed.
  • Structural properties of surviving subhaloes still follow the same tidal tracks found in earlier studies even though their total mass-loss rates differ by inclination.
  • Predictions for the spatial distribution of detectable subhalo signals inside the Milky Way must account for orbital orientation relative to the disc.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same inclination-dependent shielding mechanism may operate in other disc galaxies and alter the surviving subhalo population there.
  • Gamma-ray or neutrino surveys could test the model by checking whether signal strength varies with distance from the disc plane in the predicted way.
  • Future dynamical models of the Milky Way should include the disc's orientation when forecasting which subhaloes survive to the present day.

Load-bearing premise

The N-body simulations correctly isolate the Galactic disc as the main cause of the difference in mass-loss rates between low-inclination and coplanar orbits without major effects from the chosen Milky Way potential, resolution limits, or initial subhalo setups.

What would settle it

A map of faint gamma-ray signals from subhaloes that shows systematically stronger depletion at 0.3-2 kpc above and below the disc plane than inside the plane itself would support the claim; an absence of this pattern or the opposite pattern would falsify it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18708 by Go Ogiya, Jens St\"ucker, Junnan Shen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic illustration of the orbital configuration of a subhalo, initially located at the virial radius of its host halo. Refer to § 2.4.1 for further details. where 𝑅c (𝐸) is the radius of the circular orbit corresponding to orbital energy 𝐸, and 𝜂 ≡ 𝐿/𝐿c (𝐸), (6) where 𝐿 is the angular momentum of the subhalo orbit and 𝐿c (𝐸) is the angular momentum of the circular orbit with energy, 𝐸. The primary obje… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Bound mass fraction as a function of time for orbits with 𝑥c = 1.2, 𝜂 = 0.3, and the same inclination angle between the subhalo orbital plane and the Galactic disc plane, with 𝛼 = 75◦ (upper) and 15◦ (lower). For a fixed 𝛼, the subhalo mass-loss histories are nearly indistinguishable, even if that inclination angle is produced by different combinations of the orientation parameters 𝜃 and 𝛽. change the init… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Bound mass fraction of subhaloes as a function of time, where the subhalo mass at accretion is varied (𝑚sub = 100 âĂŞ108 𝑀⊙) while keeping 𝜂 = 0.3, and 𝛽 = 0. The top, middle, and bottom panels present the results from simulations with initial polar angles of 𝜃 = 90◦ , 45◦ , and 0 ◦ , respectively. For sufficiently small initial subhalo masses (𝑚sub < ∼ 106 𝑀⊙), the mass evolution no longer depends on 𝑚sub… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolution of the bound mass fraction for subhaloes on orbits with a fixed initial inclination angle 𝛼, but different direction of their orbital motion controlled by 𝛽. The orbital energy and angular momentum are characterized by 𝑥c = 1.2 and 𝜂 = 0.3. Lines with identical colours correspond to the same |𝛽|, with positive (negative) 𝛽 represented by solid (dashed) lines. The subhalo mass-loss history does no… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: shows how the bound mass fraction of subhaloes evolves over time in simulations with different inclination angles, 𝛼. The mass-loss efficiency exhibits a non-monotonic dependence on 𝛼. The subhalo orbiting within the Galactic disc (𝛼 = 0 ◦ , blue) expe￾10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 Limit N=2 20 Limit N=2 23 =0.3 =90 =60 =30 =15 =0 =1.15 =1.15 ,N=2 23 =0 ,N=2 23 =15 ,N=2 23 10 8 6 4 2 0 t [Gyr] 10 1 10 0 =0.7 =90 =60… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Evolution of subhaloes on circular orbits (i.e. 𝜂 = 1) with fixed orbital parameters 𝑥c = 0.5 and 𝜃 = 90◦ , while varying 𝛽, which sets the inclination angle of the orbit with respect to the Galactic disc plane, 𝛼. Black, orange, and green curves correspond to simulations with 𝛼 = 0 ◦ , 1.15◦ , and 5.74◦ , respectively. (Top left) Bound mass fraction as a function of time. (Top right) Subhalo motion along … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Subhaloes on eccentric orbits characterised by 𝑥c = 1.2, 𝜂 = 0.3 and 𝜃 = 90◦ are analysed. The blue and red curves show the simulation results for initial inclination angles of 𝛼 = 0 ◦ and 1.15◦ , respectively. Filled circles in the corresponding colours mark the times of pericentric passage. (Upper left) Bound mass fraction as a function of time. (Upper right) Subhalo motion along the 𝑍-axis in the host-c… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: presents an analysis of how tidal shocks from the Galactic disc disrupt subhaloes. We focus on the same two simulations ex￾amined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: shows the evolution of our simulated NFW subhaloes in the 𝑓b −𝑉max/𝑉max,0 (upper) and 𝑓b − 𝑅max/𝑅max,0 (lower) planes, where 𝑉max,0 and 𝑅max,0 denote the values of 𝑉max and 𝑅max before any tidal interactions occur. 𝑉max and 𝑅max are determined as the maxi￾mum value of the spherically averaged circular velocity profile of the subhalo and the radius at which this maximum occurs, respectively. We evaluate th… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Evolution of the 𝐽- (upper) and 𝐷-factors (lower) obtained from simulations in which the initial inclination angle 𝛼 between the subhalo orbit and the Galactic disc plane is varied, while keeping 𝑥c = 1.2 and 𝜂 = 0.3 fixed. The 𝐽- and 𝐷-factors are evaluated within the initial virial radius of the subhalo and are normalised to their initial values. Circles and crosses in the corresponding colours mark the… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Dark matter (DM) subhaloes orbiting inside the Milky Way (MW) are promising targets for DM searches, and reliable predictions for the detectability and spatial distribution of their signals are crucial for probing the nature of DM. Recent work showed that tidal forces from the baryonic components of the MW boost the efficiency of subhalo mass-loss, although the underlying physical processes remain insufficiently understood. This study focuses on clarifying the role of the Galactic disc. By using $N$-body simulations, we examine how the dynamical evolution of subhaloes varies with the inclination angle between their orbits and the Galactic disc. Subhaloes whose orbits are inclined by only a few degrees with respect to the Galactic disc pass through it quickly, which enhances tidal shock heating and leads to a pronounced increase in mass-loss efficiency. In contrast, when a subhalo orbit is exactly coplanar with the Galactic disc, adiabatic shielding suppresses the energy input from tidal shocks, resulting in a lower mass-loss efficiency. Tidal stripping lowers the DM density within subhaloes, thereby attenuating the luminosity of their DM signals. Consequently, we expect that subhaloes located at distances of $\sim 0.3$--$2$\,kpc from the Galactic disc plane emit only weak signals, whereas those remaining embedded in the disc are more promising candidates for indirect DM detection, provided that contamination from baryonic emission sources can be carefully modelled and subtracted. Although their mass-loss histories differ significantly, the structural evolution of subhaloes is still well described by the tidal tracks reported in the literature.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses N-body simulations to examine the dynamical evolution of dark matter subhaloes orbiting in the Milky Way, focusing on the role of the Galactic disc as a function of orbital inclination. It claims that subhaloes on orbits inclined by only a few degrees experience rapid disc passages that enhance tidal shock heating and increase mass-loss efficiency, while exactly coplanar orbits undergo adiabatic shielding that suppresses energy input from shocks and reduces mass-loss efficiency. This inclination-dependent mass loss attenuates DM density and thus signal luminosity, implying that subhaloes at ~0.3-2 kpc from the disc plane emit weak signals while those embedded in the disc are more promising for indirect detection (after baryonic subtraction). Structural evolution nonetheless follows literature tidal tracks.

Significance. If the reported inclination-dependent mass-loss mechanism holds after verification, the result would be significant for refining predictions of subhalo spatial distributions and DM annihilation signals in the inner Milky Way. It provides a physical explanation for how the disc modulates tidal effects beyond generic stripping, with direct implications for target selection in indirect detection experiments. The simulations' ability to distinguish shock heating from adiabatic shielding, if robust, adds mechanistic insight to existing tidal-track descriptions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (simulation setup and results paragraph): The central claim that mass-loss efficiency differs due to tidal shock heating versus adiabatic shielding rests on N-body outcomes, yet no resolution tests, particle-number convergence studies, force-softening variations, or comparisons against alternative Milky Way potential models are mentioned. This leaves open whether the reported difference between few-degree inclinations and exactly coplanar orbits is isolated from numerical artifacts or the specific potential choice, directly undermining in the mechanism isolation.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (results on mass-loss efficiency): No error bars, statistical measures of mass-loss differences, or quantitative comparison to analytic expectations for shock heating and adiabatic invariants are supplied, making it impossible to assess the magnitude or statistical significance of the inclination effect that underpins the detectability conclusions.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'pass through it quickly' for low-inclination orbits would benefit from a quantitative definition (e.g., crossing time relative to orbital period) to clarify the physical regime.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We address the major comments point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (simulation setup and results paragraph): The central claim that mass-loss efficiency differs due to tidal shock heating versus adiabatic shielding rests on N-body outcomes, yet no resolution tests, particle-number convergence studies, force-softening variations, or comparisons against alternative Milky Way potential models are mentioned. This leaves open whether the reported difference between few-degree inclinations and exactly coplanar orbits is isolated from numerical artifacts or the specific potential choice, directly undermining in the mechanism isolation.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that explicit demonstration of numerical convergence is crucial for the credibility of the results. The original manuscript focused on the physical mechanism but did not sufficiently highlight the tests performed. In the revised version, we will add a new subsection detailing resolution tests with varying particle numbers, force softening lengths, and comparisons to alternative Milky Way potential models. We will also briefly mention the robustness in the abstract. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (results on mass-loss efficiency): No error bars, statistical measures of mass-loss differences, or quantitative comparison to analytic expectations for shock heating and adiabatic invariants are supplied, making it impossible to assess the magnitude or statistical significance of the inclination effect that underpins the detectability conclusions.

    Authors: We acknowledge the lack of quantitative error analysis in the presented results. We will revise the manuscript to include error bars on all mass-loss curves, provide statistical significance measures for the differences between inclination angles, and add comparisons to analytic predictions for tidal shock heating and adiabatic shielding effects. This will strengthen the assessment of the inclination-dependent mass loss. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: results from forward N-body integrations

full rationale

The paper's central claims derive from direct N-body simulations of subhalo orbits interacting with a fixed Galactic disc potential. Mass-loss differences between low-inclination and coplanar orbits are reported as simulation outputs, not as quantities fitted from the same data and then relabeled as predictions. No self-citation chains, ansatzes smuggled via prior work, or redefinitions of inputs appear in the provided text; the structural evolution is explicitly tied to external literature tidal tracks rather than internal re-derivation. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against the simulation setup and does not reduce to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the assumption that the simulated tidal interactions with the galactic disc dominate subhalo evolution and that the reported structural evolution follows literature tidal tracks without additional baryonic physics.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption N-body simulations with the chosen Milky Way potential accurately capture the tidal shock and adiabatic response of subhaloes to the galactic disc
    Invoked to interpret the inclination-dependent mass-loss difference described in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5825 in / 1417 out tokens · 26960 ms · 2026-06-26T20:11:47.784762+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

111 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    and Frenk, Carlos S

    Navarro, Julio F. and Frenk, Carlos S. and White, Simon D. M. , title =. , volume =. 1997 , doi =

    1997

  2. [2]

    , volume =

    Kuijken, Konrad and Dubinski, John , title =. , volume =. 1994 , doi =

    1994

  3. [3]

    , volume =

    van den Bosch, Frank C and Ogiya, Go , title =. , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  4. [4]

    Eddington, A. S. , title =. , volume =. 1916 , doi =

    1916

  5. [5]

    , title =

    Chandrasekhar, S. , title =. , volume =. 1943 , doi =

    1943

  6. [6]

    and White, Simon D

    Mo, Houjun and van den Bosch, Frank C. and White, Simon D. M. , title =

  7. [7]

    , volume =

    Aguirre-Santaella, Alejandra and Sánchez-Conde, Miguel A and Ogiya, Go and Stücker, Jens and Angulo, Raul E , title =. , volume =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  8. [8]

    , volume =

    Kelley, Tyler and Bullock, James S and Garrison-Kimmel, Shea and Boylan-Kolchin, Michael and Pawlowski, Marcel S and Graus, Andrew S , title =. , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  9. [9]

    and Wyithe, J

    Correa, Camila A. and Wyithe, J. Stuart B. and Schaye, Joop and Duffy, Alan R. , title =. , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  10. [10]

    and Bose, Sownak and Angulo, Raúl E

    Ludlow, Aaron D. and Bose, Sownak and Angulo, Raúl E. and Wang, Lan and Hellwing, Wojciech A. and Navarro, Julio F. and Cole, Shaun and Frenk, Carlos S. , title =. , volume =. 2016 , doi =

    2016

  11. [11]

    , volume =

    Hernquist, Lars , title =. , volume =. 1990 , doi =

    1990

  12. [12]

    and Flynn, C

    Smith, R. and Flynn, C. and Candlish, G. N. and Fellhauer, M. and Gibson, B. K. , title =. , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  13. [13]

    , volume =

    Behroozi, Peter and Wechsler, Risa H and Hearin, Andrew P and Conroy, Charlie , title =. , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  14. [14]

    and Caputi, K

    Popping, G. and Caputi, K. I. and Trager, S. C. and Somerville, R. S. and Dekel, A. and Kassin, S. A. and Kocevski, D. D. and Koekemoer, A. M. and Faber, S. M. and Ferguson, H. C. and Galametz, A. and Grogin, N. A. and Guo, Y. and Lu, Y. and Wel, A. Van Der and Weiner, B. J. , title =. , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  15. [15]

    and others , title =

    Van Der Wel, A. and others , title =. , volume =. 2014 , doi =

    2014

  16. [16]

    Yang, Xiaohu and Mo, H. J. and Zhang, Youcai and van den Bosch, Frank C. , title =. , volume =. 2011 , doi =

    2011

  17. [17]

    Li, Zhao-Zhou and Zhao, Dong-Hai and Jing, Y. P. and Han, Jiaxin and Dong, Fu-Yu , title =. , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    2020

  18. [18]

    , title =

    Hopkins, Philip F. , title =. , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  19. [19]

    Plummer, H. C. , title =. , volume =

  20. [20]

    , volume =

    van den Bosch, Frank C and Ogiya, Go and Hahn, Oliver and Burkert, Andreas , title =. , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  21. [21]

    , volume =

    D'Onghia, Elena and Springel, Volker and Hernquist, Lars and Keres, Dusan , title =. , volume =. 2010 , doi =

    2010

  22. [22]

    and Hopkins, Philip F

    Garrison-Kimmel, Shea and Wetzel, Andrew and Bullock, James S. and Hopkins, Philip F. and Boylan-Kolchin, Michael and Faucher-Giguère, Claude-André and Kereš, Dušan and Quataert, Eliot and Sanderson, Robyn E. and Graus, Andrew S. and Kelley, Tyler , title =. , volume =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  23. [23]

    , volume =

    Green, Sheridan B and van den Bosch, Frank C and Jiang, Fangzhou , title =. , volume =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  24. [24]

    , volume =

    Ogiya, Go and van den Bosch, Frank C and Hahn, Oliver and Green, Sheridan B and Miller, Tim B and Burkert, Andreas , title =. , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  25. [25]

    and Aguirre-Santaella, Alejandra and Sánchez-Conde, Miguel A

    Stücker, Jens and Ogiya, Go and Angulo, Raul E. and Aguirre-Santaella, Alejandra and Sánchez-Conde, Miguel A. , title =. , volume =. 2023 , doi =

    2023

  26. [26]

    , volume =

    Bertone, Gianfranco and Hooper, Dan and Silk, Joseph , title =. , volume =. 2005 , doi =

    2005

  27. [27]

    Bertone, Gianfranco and Hooper, Dan , title =. Rev. Mod. Phys. , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  28. [28]

    Garrett, Katherine and Dūda, Gintaras , title =. Adv. Astron. , volume =. 2011 , doi =

    2011

  29. [29]

    and others , title =

    Aghanim, N. and others , title =. , volume =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  30. [30]

    Kahlhoefer, Felix , title =. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A , volume =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  31. [31]

    Bertone, GIANFRANCO and Merritt, DAVID , title =. Mod. Phys. Lett. A , volume =. 2005 , doi =

    2005

  32. [32]

    A , title =

    Hinton, J. A , title =. New Astron. Rev. , volume =. 2004 , doi =

    2004

  33. [33]

    C and others , title =

    Weekes, T. C and others , title =. Astropart. Phys. , volume =. 2002 , doi =

    2002

  34. [34]

    Astropart. Phys. , volume =. 1999 , doi =

    1999

  35. [35]

    and others , title =

    Achterberg, A. and others , title =. Astropart. Phys. , volume =. 2006 , doi =

    2006

  36. [36]

    Battiston, Roberto , title =. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A , volume =. 2008 , doi =

    2008

  37. [37]

    and others , title =

    Picozza, P. and others , title =. Astropart. Phys. , volume =. 2007 , doi =

    2007

  38. [38]

    and Johnson, Robert P

    Porter, Troy A. and Johnson, Robert P. and Graham, Peter W. , title =. , volume =. 2011 , doi =

    2011

  39. [39]

    and White, Simon D

    Springel, Volker and Frenk, Carlos S. and White, Simon D. M. , title =. , volume =. 2006 , doi =

    2006

  40. [40]

    and White, S.d.m

    Frenk, C.s. and White, S.d.m. , title =. Ann. Phys. , volume =. 2012 , doi =

    2012

  41. [41]

    , title =

    Zavala, Jesús and Frenk, Carlos S. , title =. Galaxies , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  42. [42]

    , volume =

    Diemand, Jürg and Kuhlen, Michael and Madau, Piero , title =. , volume =. 2007 , doi =

    2007

  43. [43]

    Nature Reviews Physics , volume =

    Vogelsberger, Mark and Marinacci, Federico and Torrey, Paul and Puchwein, Ewald , title =. Nature Reviews Physics , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    2020

  44. [44]

    and Hahn, Oliver , title =

    Angulo, Raul E. and Hahn, Oliver , title =. Living Rev. Comput. Astrophys. , volume =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  45. [45]

    , volume =

    Vogelsberger, Mark and others , title =. , volume =. 2014 , doi =

    2014

  46. [46]

    , volume =

    Sawala, Till and others , title =. , volume =. 2016 , doi =

    2016

  47. [47]

    , volume =

    Fattahi, Azadeh and others , title =. , volume =. 2016 , doi =

    2016

  48. [48]

    and Baugh, Carlton M

    Angulo, Raul E. and Baugh, Carlton M. and Frenk, Carlos S. and Lacey, Cedric G. , title =. , volume =. 2014 , doi =

    2014

  49. [49]

    and Kuhlen, M

    Diemand, J. and Kuhlen, M. and Madau, P. and Zemp, M. and Moore, B. and Potter, D. and Stadel, J. , title =. , volume =. 2008 , doi =

    2008

  50. [50]

    and others , title =

    Springel, V. and others , title =. , volume =. 2008 , doi =

    2008

  51. [51]

    , volume =

    Ishiyama, Tomoaki and others , title =. , volume =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  52. [52]

    and Taylor, James E

    Hayashi, Eric and Navarro, Julio F. and Taylor, James E. and Stadel, Joachim and Quinn, Thomas , title =. , volume =. 2003 , doi =

    2003

  53. [53]

    , volume =

    Errani, Raphaël and Peñarrubia, Jorge , title =. , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    2020

  54. [54]

    , title =

    Amorisco, Nicola C. , title =. , volume =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  55. [55]

    , volume =

    Grand, Robert J J and others , title =. , volume =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  56. [56]

    , volume =

    Grand, Robert J J and White, Simon D M , title =. , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    2020

  57. [57]

    , volume =

    Searching for. , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  58. [58]

    , volume =

    Coronado-Blázquez, Javier and others , title =. , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  59. [59]

    Galaxies , volume =

    Ando, Shin’ichiro and Ishiyama, Tomoaki and Hiroshima, Nagisa , title =. Galaxies , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  60. [60]

    and Prada, Francisco , title =

    Sánchez-Conde, Miguel A. and Prada, Francisco , title =. , volume =. 2014 , doi =

    2014

  61. [61]

    and Palomares-Ruiz, Sergio and Prada, Francisco , title =

    Moliné, Ángeles and Sánchez-Conde, Miguel A. and Palomares-Ruiz, Sergio and Prada, Francisco , title =. , volume =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  62. [62]

    , volume =

    Hiroshima, Nagisa and Ando, Shin’ichiro and Ishiyama, Tomoaki , title =. , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  63. [63]

    , volume =

    Fujii, Michiko and Funato, Yoko and Makino, Junichiro , title =. , volume =. 2006 , doi =

    2006

  64. [64]

    , volume =

    Miller, Tim B and van den Bosch, Frank C and Green, Sheridan B and Ogiya, Go , title =. , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    2020

  65. [65]

    Nature Physics , volume =

    Buchmueller, Oliver and Doglioni, Caterina and Wang, Lian-Tao , title =. Nature Physics , volume =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  66. [66]

    Penning, Björn , title =. J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  67. [67]

    and Harnik, Roni and Kopp, Joachim and Tsai, Yuhsin , title =

    Fox, Patrick J. and Harnik, Roni and Kopp, Joachim and Tsai, Yuhsin , title =. , volume =. 2012 , doi =

    2012

  68. [68]

    Gravitational Lensing , author =. Class. Quantum Grav. , volume =. 2010 , doi =

    2010

  69. [69]

    , volume =

    Strong Lensing by Galaxies , author =. , volume =. 2010 , doi =

    2010

  70. [70]

    , volume =

    Streams in the Galaxy , author =. , volume =. 2002 , doi =

    2002

  71. [71]

    , volume =

    Forensics of Subhalo–Stream Encounters: The Three Phases of Gap Growth , author =. , volume =. 2016 , doi =

    2016

  72. [72]

    , year = 1992, volume = 256, pages =

    Suppressing the formation of dwarf galaxies via photoionization. , year = 1992, volume = 256, pages =

    1992

  73. [73]

    , year = 2000, volume = 542, number = 2, pages =

    Effect of Reionization on Structure Formation in the Universe. , year = 2000, volume = 542, number = 2, pages =

    2000

  74. [74]

    , year = 2008, volume = 390, number = 3, pages =

    Mass loss of galaxies caused by the background radiation field. , year = 2008, volume = 390, number = 3, pages =

    2008

  75. [75]

    , year = 1975, volume = 27, pages =

    Three-dimensional models for the distribution of mass in galaxies. , year = 1975, volume = 27, pages =

    1975

  76. [76]

    A numerical convergence study

    The inner structure of CDM haloes - I. A numerical convergence study. , year = 2003, volume = 338, number = 1, pages =

    2003

  77. [77]

    , volume =

    Jungman, Gerard and Kamionkowski, Marc and Griest, Kim , title = ". , volume =. 1996 , doi =

    1996

  78. [78]

    , volume =

    Cirelli, Marco and Corcella, Gennaro and Hektor, Andi and others , title = ". , volume =. 2011 , doi =

    2011

  79. [79]

    om, Lars and Ullio, Piero and Buckley, James H. , title =

    Bergstr\"om, Lars and Ullio, Piero and Buckley, James H. , title = ". Astropart. Phys. , volume =. 1998 , doi =

    1998

  80. [80]

    Wyn and Ferrer, Francesc and Sarkar, Subir , title = "

    Evans, N. Wyn and Ferrer, Francesc and Sarkar, Subir , title = ". , volume =. 2004 , doi =

    2004

Showing first 80 references.