}<M_{*}<7.4\times10^{10}{\rm M_\odot}$. We further select local group samples by requiring a companion giant galaxy with a stellar mass similar to that of the M31 $0.5\times
M_{\rm MW}<M_{*}<2 \times M_{\rm MW}$, within $1$Mpc from the ’Milky Way’. Because the Milky Way and M31 are the brightest galaxies within $1$Mpc, we also require that no bright galaxies are present in the same volume besides the ’MW’ and ’M31’. Finally we exclude systems with clusters ($10^{14}
{\rm M_\odot}$) close by ($< 10 Mpc$). These constraints result in a sample of $77$ local groups in our full simulation box. \[subsec:lf\]

![The cumulative number of the simulated local void samples ${\rm N_{LV}}$ as a function of the number of galaxy enclosed ${\rm N_{void}}$.[]{data-label="fig:numd"}](numd.ps){width="45.00000%"}

![image](void_all.ps){width="100.00000%"}

It is important to see whether the luminosity function (LF) of the simulated local volumes agree with that of observed galaxies  [@karachentsev13]. In Figure \[fig:lvlf\], we show galaxy number counts as a function of apparent magnitude for both the observed Local Volume and our simulated local volume samples. Here we use distance between galaxies and the MW to calculate the apparent magnitude. The black line with Poisson error bars is from the observational data of [@karachentsev13], the red solid line shows the median values of our simulation. The dashed lines denote $1 \sigma$ deviations. Clearly our simulations are in excellent agreement with current observational data. No completeness correction is applied here. Note that the galaxy catalog of [@karachentsev13] was estimated to complete about $70-90\%$ at apparent magnitude $m_{B}=17.5$, which corresponds to the flat faint end of the observed galaxy counts. Predictions from our galaxy formation model rather prefer an continued increase in the galaxy number counts at the faint end. This should be further constrained by future surveys extending to fainter limits.

We apply an identical procedure for identifying the Local Void in the Local Volume to each of our simulated local volumes, i.e. finding the most empty truncated cone shaped region. For each of them,
} < M_{*}<7.4\times10^{10}{\rm M_\odot}$. We further select local group samples by requiring a companion colossus galaxy with a leading mass similar to that of the M31 $ 0.5\times 
 M_{\rm MW}<M_{*}<2 \times M_{\rm MW}$, within $ 1$Mpc from the ’ Milky direction ’. Because the Milky Way and M31 are the bright galaxies within $ 1$Mpc, we also want that no undimmed galaxies are present in the same volume besides the ’ MW ’ and ’ M31 ’. Finally we exclude system with clusters ($ 10^{14 } 
 { \rm M_\odot}$) close by ($ < 10 Mpc$). These constraints result in a sample of $ 77 $ local groups in our entire simulation box. \[subsec: lf\ ] 

! [ The cumulative issue of the simulated local void samples $ { \rm N_{LV}}$ as a function of the act of galaxy enclosed $ { \rm N_{void}}$.[]{data - label="fig: numd"}](numd.ps){width="45.00000% " } 

! [ image](void_all.ps){width="100.00000% " } 

 It is important to see whether the luminosity function (LF) of the fake local volumes agree with that of observed galaxies   [ @karachentsev13 ]. In Figure   \[fig: lvlf\ ], we show galax act counts as a function of apparent magnitude for both the observed Local Volume and our simulated local volume samples. Here we use distance between galaxies and the MW to account the apparent magnitude. The black occupation with Poisson mistake bars is from the observational data of [ @karachentsev13 ], the crimson solid line shows the median value of our simulation. The dashed lines denote $ 1 \sigma$ deviations. distinctly our simulations are in excellent agreement with current observational data. No completeness correction is apply here. notice that the galax catalog of [ @karachentsev13 ] was estimate to complete about $ 70 - 90\%$ at apparent magnitude $ m_{B}=17.5 $, which corresponds to the two-dimensional faint end of the observed galaxy counts. Predictions from our galaxy formation mannequin rather choose an continued increase in the galaxy number counts at the dim end. This should be further constrained by future surveys stretch to fainter limits. 

 We apply an identical procedure for identifying the Local Void in the Local Volume to each of our simulated local volume, i.e. finding the about empty truncated cone shaped region. For each of them,
}<M_{*}<7.4\tiles10^{10}{\rm M_\odot}$. We further stlect local group samplev by rsquiring a companion giant galaxy wivh a steloar mass similar to thxt of the M31 $0.5\times
N_{\rm NQ}<M_{*}<2 \times M_{\cj MW}$, wibkin $1$Mlg frok the ’Milky Way’. Because tve Milky Way atd M31 are the brightest galaxies within $1$Ipc, we sldo require thaj no nwighf galaxies are present in the same volume besides the ’KW’ and ’M31’. Finally we excludf sydtems with clusterd ($10^{14}
{\rm M_\odot}$) xlosq by ($< 10 Mpc$). Thdse constraints result in a sample of $77$ local groups iv our full simuoarioj box. \[subsec:of\]

![The cumulative klmber ox the somulated local vomd sqmples ${\rm N_{LV}}$ as a fuiction of the number of galaxf znclosed ${\rm N_{void}}$.[]{data-oavel="fic:numg"}](numa.ps){wkdtg="45.00000%"}

![ikafe](void_wll.'s){width="100.00000%"}

It ia important to see whether the ltninosity funcfion (LS) jf the simulated local volumes agree wiuh thzt of observed galaxies  [@karachentsev13]. In Figute \[fig:lvlf\], re show galaxy number counts as a function of appdrent oagulbude dog both the observed Local Volume and our simujzttd kocal volume scmples. Here we uxe doftance betweev galarjea and the MW to capculate the qpparent iagnotude. The black line with Piisson error vars is from the oyservational dats of [@larachentsev13], the red souid mine shows hhe mediah values of our skmukadion. The dashed lines denoee $1 \sigma$ devnations. Zleatly our simulatiojs arc in excellent agrefment whth currenh observational data. No completxiess correctipn is applied here. Note that thq galaxy catalpg of [@kcrachevtsev13] was vstimated to completq about $70-90\%$ at a[karent magnitnde $m_{B}=17.5$, whych xorrwsponds go the flat faont end oy the observed galaxy cpunjs. Predictions frim iur galaxy formstiun iofek wdther prefer an zongonued increase ik tfe gslaxy number counts dt tge faint end. This xhjuld be durther sonstrained bu future surveys edtendmng to fainyer limits.

We apply an identical pdocedure vor identifying the Local Void nn the Local Volume to each of our simuleted local volumes, i.e. funding the most empjy uruncated conx shapqd region. For each of them,
}<M_{*}<7.4\times10^{10}{\rm M_\odot}$. We further select local group requiring companion giant with a stellar the $0.5\times M_{\rm MW}<M_{*}<2 M_{\rm MW}$, within from the ’Milky Way’. Because the Way and M31 are the brightest galaxies within $1$Mpc, we also require that bright galaxies are present in the same volume besides the ’MW’ and ’M31’. we systems clusters {\rm M_\odot}$) close by ($< 10 Mpc$). These constraints result in a sample of $77$ local in our full simulation box. \[subsec:lf\] ![The cumulative of the simulated local samples ${\rm N_{LV}}$ as a of number of enclosed N_{void}}$.[]{data-label="fig:numd"}](numd.ps){width="45.00000%"} It is important see whether the luminosity function (LF) of the simulated local volumes agree with that of observed galaxies In Figure show galaxy counts a of apparent magnitude the observed Local Volume and our samples. Here we use distance between galaxies and MW to the apparent magnitude. The black line Poisson error bars is from the observational data [@karachentsev13], the red solid line shows the median values of our simulation. The dashed lines \sigma$ deviations. Clearly our are in excellent with observational No correction is here. Note that the galaxy catalog of [@karachentsev13] was estimated to about $70-90\%$ at apparent magnitude $m_{B}=17.5$, which corresponds to the end the observed galaxy Predictions from our galaxy model prefer an continued increase galaxy counts end. should further constrained by future extending to fainter limits. We an identical procedure for the Local Volume to each of our simulated volumes, i.e. finding the most empty truncated shaped region. For each of them,
}<M_{*}<7.4\times10^{10}{\rm M_\odot}$. We further selEct local grOup saMplEs bY rEquiRing A companion gianT GalaXy with a stellar mass simiLar to ThAT of tHE M31 $0.5\Times
m_{\rm MW}<M_{*}<2 \tIMeS m_{\Rm Mw}$, wItHin $1$mpC FrOm the ’milKy Way’. BeCause the MiLky waY and M31 are the bRIgHtest galaxIes Within $1$Mpc, we aLso RequirE tHat NO brigHt gAlaxiEs are pREsent iN the same vOlUMe besiDEs the ’MW’ AND ’M31’. finaLly we exclude systeMS wITh clusters ($10^{14}
{\rm M_\oDot}$) cloSe BY ($< 10 MPC$). theSe cOnstraints ReSult iN A sample OF $77$ lOCAL grOUps in our full sImulation boX. \[SubSec:lf\]

![THe CumULative NumbeR oF The Simulated loCal vOid sampleS ${\rm N_{LV}}$ AS a functIOn of the Number Of gAlaXy enCLoSeD ${\rm n_{vOId}}$.[]{dATa-LabEL="fiG:numd"}](numD.pS){wIdth="45.00000%"}

![iMage](VOID_All.pS){wiDth="100.00000%"}

IT is imPortant to see wHetHer tHE luMinosIty fuNctiOn (lF) of tHe simuLated LoCal volumes agree With That of obsErvEd GalAxIes  [@kaRAchentSev13]. in FIgure \[fiG:lvlf\], we SHow GaLAXY nUmber counts as a funcTiON Of Apparent MagnitUDe FoR Both the oBsErvEd LoCAL VoluMe anD OuR simulatEd locaL VoLuMe samplEs. here we UsE diStaNce beTWeen GalaxiEs and the mW to cALculate the appaREnt magnitude. THE bLACk LIne wIth poisson erroR barS Is frOm thE ObSerVAtionAl datA oF [@KaRAchentsev13], the red soliD lIne shoWs the Median values oF our simulaTION. The dashEd liNEs DEnote $1 \sigma$ deviAtionS. Clearly ouR SimulatiOns arE in excelLent agreeMENt with cuRreNt oBseRvaTIOnAl data. No complETEnesS cOrrectiOn iS applieD heRe. NOte ThaT tHe galaxy cAtalog of [@KaRaChEnTseV13] was eSTimated tO cOmpLeTe aBout $70-90\%$ aT AppareNt magNituDe $M_{B}=17.5$, WHicH corresPOnDS To thE fLaT faiNt eNd Of the ObseRVed Galaxy cOunts. PredIctIOns fRoM oUr galaxY formation modEl Rather prefEr An cOntinuED Increase In the galaxy number counts AT the faiNt eNd. ThiS shoUld be furtHer ConstrAinED by futUre surVeys eXtEndING to faINTeR liMiTs.

We apply aN IDenTical PrOcedUre for iDentifying the Local vOid In the Local VolUme To eaCH Of Our SImULatEd LOcaL VOlumes, i.e. finding The most empTy TRuNcated cone SHapEd Region. FOr each oF them,
}<M_{*}<7.4\times10^{10}{\ rm M_\odot }$. W e f urt he r se lect  local group s a mple s by requiring a compa niongi a nt g a la xy wi th a st e ll a r  ma ss  s imi la r  t o tha t o f the M 31 $0.5\ti mes 
M _{\rm MW}<M_ { *} <2 \timesM_{ \rm MW}$, wi thi n $1$M pc  fr o m the  ’M ilkyWay’.B ecause  the Milk yW ay and M31 are t he  bri ghtest galaxies w i th i n $1$Mpc, we a lso re qu i re t hat  no  bright ga la xiesa re pres e nt i n  th e  same volumebesides the ’MW ’ and’M 31’ .  Final ly we  e x clu de systemswith  clusters  ($10^ { 14}
{\r m  M_\odo t}$) c los e b y ($ <  1 0Mpc $) .  Th e se  co n str aints re su lt  in a  sam p l e of $ 77$  loc al gr oups in our f ull  sim u lat ion b ox. \ [sub se c:lf\ ]

![T he cu mu lative number o f th e simulat edlo cal  v oid s a mples${\ rmN_{LV}} $ as af unc ti o n of  the number of gal ax y en closed $ {\rm N _ {v oi d }}$.[]{d at a-l abel = " fig:n umd" } ]( numd.ps) {width = "4 5. 00000%" }
![ima ge ](v oid _all. p s){w idth=" 100.0000 0%"}It is importan t  to see wheth e rt h el umin osi ty function  (LF )  ofthes im ula t ed lo cal v ol u me s  agree with that of  o bserve d gal axies  [@kara chentsev13 ] . In Figur e \[ f ig : lvlf\], we sho w gal axy number counts a s a f unctionof appare n t  magnitu defor  bo tht h eobserved Loca l Volu me  and ou r s imulate d l oca l v olu me  samples.  Here we  u se  d is tan ce be t ween gal ax ies  a ndthe M W  to ca lcula te t he  a p par ent mag n it u d e. T he  b lack  li ne  with  Poi s son  errorbars is f rom theob se rvation al data of [@ ka rachentsev 13 ],the re d solid li ne shows the median val u es of o ursimul atio n. The da she d line s d e note $ 1 \sig ma$ d ev iat i o ns. C l e ar lyou r simulati o n s a re in  e xcel lent ag reement with curre n t o bservationaldat a. N o co mpl e te n ess  c o rre c t ion is appliedhere. Note  t h at  the galax y  ca ta log of[@karac hents e v13] wa s estimat ed to com pl etea b out  $70-90\%$  at appa rent magn i tude$ m_ {B}=1 7.5 $, whi ch  co rresp onds t o  th e fla t fain tend of  theob served g alaxy counts. Predictio ns fro m our  ga laxy form ati o n m odel rath er p refer an c ont inu ed in cre a se in  the ga lax y  numb er c o unts at t h efai n t  e nd. This sh o u l d b e fur the r  const rain ed by future surv e ys extending t o fa i n ter  li m its. 
We apply an id ent ic a l  procedu re  for identi fying th eL ocalVoid i n theLocal V o l um e  to ea ch o f o ur simula ted  l o cal vol um es ,  i.e.find in g themost e m ptyt r uncated cone sha ped r e g ion.F oreachof  them,
}<M_{*}<7.4\times10^{10}{\rm M_\odot}$._We further_select local group samples_by requiring_a_companion giant_galaxy_with a stellar_mass similar to_that of the M31_$0.5\times
M_{\rm MW}<M_{*}<2 \times_M_{\rm_MW}$, within $1$Mpc from the ’Milky Way’. Because the Milky Way and M31 are_the_brightest galaxies_within_$1$Mpc,_we also require that no_bright galaxies are present in_the same_volume besides the ’MW’ and ’M31’. Finally we_exclude_systems with clusters_($10^{14}
{\rm M_\odot}$) close by ($< 10 Mpc$). These constraints_result in a sample of $77$_local groups in_our_full_simulation box. \[subsec:lf\]

![The cumulative_number of the simulated local void_samples ${\rm N_{LV}}$ as a function_of the number of galaxy enclosed ${\rm_N_{void}}$.[]{data-label="fig:numd"}](numd.ps){width="45.00000%"}

![image](void_all.ps){width="100.00000%"}

It is important to see whether_the luminosity function (LF) of_the simulated_local volumes agree with that_of observed galaxies_ [@karachentsev13]. In_Figure \[fig:lvlf\], we show_galaxy number counts as a function_of apparent magnitude_for both the observed Local Volume_and_our simulated local_volume_samples._Here we_use distance between_galaxies_and the_MW_to calculate the apparent magnitude. The_black_line with Poisson error bars is from_the observational data of_[@karachentsev13],_the red solid line_shows the median values of_our simulation. The dashed lines denote_$1 \sigma$_deviations. Clearly_our simulations are in excellent agreement with current observational data. No_completeness correction is applied here. Note_that the galaxy catalog_of [@karachentsev13]_was_estimated to complete_about_$70-90\%$ at_apparent magnitude $m_{B}=17.5$, which corresponds to the_flat faint_end of the observed galaxy counts._Predictions from our galaxy_formation_model rather prefer an continued increase_in the galaxy number counts at_the faint end. This should_be_further_constrained by future surveys extending_to fainter limits.

We apply an identical_procedure for identifying_the Local Void in the Local Volume_to_each of our simulated local volumes,_i.e._finding the most empty truncated cone_shaped_region._For each of them,