Evolution of halo-halo clustering and bias in a ΛCDM model

Dark matter (DM) halos may, in general, be biased with respect to the overall matter distribution. Understanding this bias and its evolution are of primary importance for interpretation of the galaxy clustering data at low and high redshifts. In this contribution we present results of a direct estimate of the halo-halo two-point correlation function (CF) and bias at z=0 and their evolution with time in a large cosmological N-body simulation. The simulation of a LCDM model (Om=1.0-Ol=0.3; h=0.7; sigma_8=1.0), done with the high-resolution Adaptive Refinement Tree (ART) N-body code, followed the evolution of about 16.7 million particles (m_p=10⁹/h Msun) in a 60/h = 85 Mpc periodic box, with peak force resolution of about 2-3/h kpc (dynamic range of 32000). The high spatial and mass resolutions allow us to resolve halos even in high-density regions corresponding to galaxy groups and clusters. Care has been taken to develop a halo finding algorithm for automatic identification of halos (see Gottloeber et al. in these proceedings), which identifies halos reliably even in high-density regions typical of galaxy clusters and groups. The main results of the study are as follows. 1. While the CF of DM increases by some 2 orders of magnitude from z=10 to z=0, the halo-halo CF shows virtually no evolution. Some mild evolution is observed, however, at very high (z>5) and low (z<1) redshifts. 2. The halo-halo CF at all redshifts is well described by a power law with a slope of 1.7 and characteristic scale, r0, of about 5/h Mpc. At z=0 our halo-halo correlation function agrees very well (in both slope and amplitude and on all scales) with the galaxy-galaxy CF from the APM galaxy survey. 3. The bias parameter at z=0 is found to be non-linear (scale-dependent) and <1 (antibias) at scales < 3/h Mpc; at larger scales the bias is linear and is about unity (no bias). 4. The bias evolves very rapidly with redshift, decreasing from a value of 3-5 at redshifts z=4-5, to 0.6-1 at z=0. We discuss the interpretation of the results and compare the observed bias evolution with predictions of analytic models of biasing.