--- abstract: 'We introduce a new technique that adopts the halo occupation framework for understanding the origin of QSO absorption-line systems. Our initial study focuses specifically on MgII absorbers. We construct a model of the gaseous content in which the absorption equivalent width $\wr$ is determined by the the amount of cold gas, in the form of discrete clouds, along a sightline through a halo. The two quantities that we specify per halo in the model are (1) the mean absorption strength per unit surface mass density $A_W(M)$, and (2) the mean covering factor $\cg(M)$ of the gaseous clouds. These parameters determine the conditional probability distribution of $\wr$ as a function of halo mass, $P(\wr|M)$. Two empirical measurements are applied to constrain the model: (i) the absorber frequency distribution function and (ii) the $\wr$-dependent clustering amplitude. We find that the data demand a rapid transition in the gas content of halos at $\sim 10^{11.5}$ , below which halos contain predominantly cold gas and beyond which gas becomes predominantly hot. In order to reproduce the observed overall strong clustering of the absorbers and the anti-correlation between $\wr$ and halo mass $M$, roughly 5% of gas in halos up to $10^{14}$ is required to be cold. The gas covering factor is near unity over a wide range of halo mass, supporting that MgII systems probe an unbiased sample of typical galaxies. We discuss the implications of our study in the contexts of mass assembly of distant galaxies and the origin of QSO absorption line systems.' author: - 'Jeremy L. Tinker& Hsiao-Wen Chen' bibliography: - '../risa.bib' title: On The Halo Occupation of Dark Baryons --- Introduction ============ The forest of absorption line systems observed in the spectra of background QSOs is a sensitive probe of intervening baryonic matter that is otherwise invisible (see @rauch:98 for a comprehensive review). The gaseous clouds uncovered by these absorption features span a wide range of ionization state and neutral hydrogen column density over $N({\mbox{${\rm H\ I}$}})= 10^{12}-10^{22}\,{\mbox{${\rm cm^{-2}}$}}$ and are understood to originate in a range of environments in the dark matter distribution, from moderate overdensities to fully collapsed structures (e.g. @dave_etal:99). Strong absorbers with $N({\mbox{${\rm H\ I}$}})\gtrsim 2\times 10^{20}\,{\mbox{${\rm cm^{-2}}$}}$ are thought to be the high-redshift analogue to present-day galaxies (@wolfe_etal:05). Studies of these high-density neutral gas clouds show that they all contain low ions such as Si$^+$, Fe$^{+}$, and Mg$^+$ (e.g. @lu_wolfe:94 [@prochaska_etal:03]). Conversely, studies indicate that MgII absorbers of rest-frame absorption equivalent width $W_r(2796)\ge 0.3$ Å arise in gaseous clouds of $N({\mbox{${\rm H\ I}$}})= 10^{18}-10^{22}\,{\mbox{${\rm cm^{-2}}$}}$ (@churchill_etal:00 [@rao_etal:06]). Over the redshift range $z=0.35-2.5$, the MgII $\lambda\lambda\,2796, 2803$ doublet transitions are shifted to the optical spectral range $\lambda_{\rm obs}=3800-10,000$ Å and therefore provide a convenient optical probe of dark baryons in extended gaseous halos of typical galaxies along random lines of sight. Extensive studies of the physical properties of MgII absorbers have been carried out by various authors. Early studies that compared abundance ratios between different ions associated with MgII absorbers showed that these absorbers arise in photo-ionized gas of temperature $T\sim 10^4$ K (e.g. @bergeron_stasinska:86 [@hamann:97]). In addition, high-resolution spectra of strong absorbers also show that these systems are multi-component, with $W_r$ roughly proportional to the number of components in the system (@petitjean_bergeron:90 [@churchill_vogt:01; @prochter_etal:06]). Finally, comparisons of galaxies and MgII absorbers along common lines of sight also indicate that MgII absorbers at $\langle z\rangle=0.65$ are associated with luminous galaxies (@bergeron:86 [@steidel_etal:94]) and that field galaxies possess extended gaseous halos to projected distances of $r\approx 50$ (@lanzetta_bowen:90 [@steidel:93]). Extended halos of cool gas around galaxies were predicted by @spitzer:56 and discussed in more detail in @bahcall_spitzer:69. Theoretical models that explain the origin of extended gaseous halos around galaxies include (i) the stripping of gas from the accretion of small, gas-rich satellites into a larger system (@wang:93); (ii) cold gas gravitationally bound to small-scale substructure within the dark matter halo (e.g., @sternberg_etal:02); and (iii) a two-phase medium, cold clouds condense out of a hotter halo through thermal instability (@mo_jordi:96 [@maller_bullock:04; @chelouche_etal:07]). These models imply that $W_r$ reflects the potential well of the dark matter halo—more massive systems sustain bigger gaseous halos with a higher velocity dispersion. However, recent studies have yielded conflicting results that challenge this classical picture. While some authors present observations that suggest strong MgII absorbers originating primarily in galactic superwinds from low-mass galaxies (@prochter_etal:06 [@bouche_etal:06; @murphy_etal:07]), others show that MgII absorbing galaxies resemble typical field galaxies (@zibetti_etal:05 [@kacprzak_etal:07; @nestor_etal:07]) and the covering fraction of Mg$^+$ ions is roughly 50% (@tripp_bowen:05). A particularly puzzling result is the anti-correlation between $W_r(2796)$ (hereafter $\wr$) and clustering amplitude by @bouche_etal:06 (hereafter B06). These authors measured the cross-correlation function of 2 absorbers and luminous red galaxies (LRGs) in data release three of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS DR3; @sdss_dr3). From the relative bias with respect to LRGs, B06 inferred the mean halo mass of absorbers as a function of $W_r$, finding that strong absorbers of $W_r=2-2.85$ Å on average arise in less massive dark matter halos of $\logmbar=11.11$, while absorbers of $W_r=0.3-1.15$ Å on average arise in dark matter halos of $\logmbar=12.49$. The authors consider this anti-correlation in strong favor of a superwind origin for $W_r>1$ Å absorbers; the large equivalent width in low-mass systems is attributed to the outflow velocity of the systems undergoing starburst episodes. The cross-correlation function of absorbers and galaxies on large scales ($\gtrsim 1$) provides a quantitative characterization of the origin of these absorbers. The clustering of absorbers is a consequence of the halos in which they are found. Low-mass halos form in a wide range of environments while high-mass halos can only form in the most dense regions of the dark matter distribution, thus high-mass halos are highly clustered. The clustering of halos depends only on simple gravitational physics, and the bias of dark matter halos as a function of mass is a well-established relation in the standard CDM cosmology. Thus it is straightforward to infer a mean halo mass from large-scale clustering, as presented in B06. However, when interpreting the clustering of gaseous clouds based on the presence of a specific ion, it is necessary to consider the state of the gas in the dark matter halos. For example, if the observed Mg$^+$ ions originate in photo-ionized gas of temperature $T\sim 10^4$ K, then the observed anti-correlation between $W_r$ and $\langle M\rangle$ may be produced when the halo gas in massive dark matter halos becomes too hot for abundant Mg$^+$ to survive. To investigate how the content of warm/cold gas depends on halo mass, we introduce a new technique that adopts the halo occupation framework for studying the origin of MgII absorbers. This same technique can also be applied for studying the nature of QSO absorption-line systems. Our halo occupation approach is similar to the Halo Occupation Distribution (HOD) method that was developed to establish an empirical mapping between galaxies and dark matter halos (e.g., @seljak:00 [@roman_etal:01; @berlind_weinberg:02]; see @zheng_weinberg:07 and references therein). This mapping is purely statistical in nature; it interprets galaxy bias based on the probability that a halo of mass $M$ contains $N$ galaxies of a given class, $P(N|M)$. The probability, $P(N|M)$, is constrained by measurements of the space density of the class of objects and their two-point auto-correlation function. HOD analysis of galaxy clustering data can provide insight into galaxy formation and evolution (@vdb_etal:03b [@cooray:06; @zheng_etal:07; @white_etal:07; @tinker_etal:07c]) and to constrain cosmological parameters (@vdb_etal:03 [@vdb_etal:07; @tinker_etal:05; @tinker:07; @zheng_weinberg:07]). In this paper, we extend this framework to characterize the cold gas detected through QSO absorption lines and focus specifically on MgII absorbers. To study the dark matter halo population of MgII absorbers, we adopt a conditional probability distribution of equivalent widths $P(W_r|M)$ to describe the halo occupation of cold gas. Our technique is fundamentally the same as the conditional luminosity function for interpreting galaxy bias (@yang_etal:03 [@vdb_etal:07]). In our approach, we choose to parameterize $P(\wr|M)$—the distribution of $\wr$ within a halo of given mass—according to expectations of a uniform gaseous halo, in which the equivalent width is proportional to the density-weighted path-length along a sight-line through the halo. The parameters of $P(\wr|M)$ are left free and constrained by empirical data. The available observations are (1) the frequency distribution function $d^2N/(d\wr\,dz)$, the number density of absorbers per unit absorption equivalent width interval per unit redshift path, and (2) the large-scale bias relative to LRGs. The halo occupation analysis allows us to go beyond simply estimating the mean mass of dark matter halos that host absorbers and constrain the distribution of these halos as a function of $\wr$. We will consider two scenarios for $P(\wr|M)$. In the first scenario, the fraction of cold gas relative to dark matter mass is a smoothly varying function of halo mass. This scenerio is motivated by the canonical model for halo gas in which accreting gas is always shock-heated to the virial temperature when it crosses the virial radius (e.g., @white_frenk:91). The gas then cools from the inside out, creating a cooling radius that varies with the properties of the halo. We will demonstrate that this model cannot simultaneously fit the frequency and bias data; models of this type that reproduce the frequency distribution predict a positive correlation between $\wr$ and $M$ because more massive halos are expected to contain more absorbing gas. Taking into account the fact that the MgII transitions probe primarily warm, photo-ionized gas, we include in the second model a transitional mass scale, at which shock heated gas progressively takes over higher mass halos and the absorption efficiency is significantly reduced. In the transition region between entirely 'cold-mode' and 'hot-mode' halos, heating occurs as an <span> *inside-out*</span> process. Namely, a highly ionized core expands until it envelopes the entire gas halo (e.g., @dekel_birnboim:06). We allow the mass scale and width of this transition to be free parameters. In addition, we allow some fraction of cold gas in the hot halos that is also constrained by empirical data. We demonstrate that the second scenario reproduces both the observed $d^2N/(d\wr\,dz)$ and bias data well. We obtain a best-fit transitional mass scale of $\sim 10^{11.5}$ and a cold gas fraction (as represented by the Mg$^+$ ions) of $< 10$% in massive halos. Given the agreement between observations and our halo occupation model, we argue that it is not necessary to invoke additional, complicated star formation feedback for explaining the inverse correlation between $W_r$ and $\langle M\rangle$. We demonstrate that the halo occupation approach allows us to gain physical insights for (1) understanding the origin of intervening absorbers observed in the spectra of background QSOs, and (2) constraining the distribution of baryons in dark matter halos. We discuss these results in the context of gas accretion in recent theoretical developments (i.e., @birnboim_dekel:03 [@dekel_birnboim:06; @keres_etal:05; @birnboim_etal:07]). This paper is organized as the following. In § 2, we outline the theoretical framework for constructing the conditional probability distribution of equivalent widths $P(\wr|M)$. In § 3, we derive the observables that characterize the statistical properties of MgII absorbers, based on known dark matter halo statistics and $P(\wr|M)$. In § 4, we compare the model predictions with empirical measurements for 2 absorbers. In § 5, we apply the best-fit model to predict additional statistical quantities on the galaxy–absorber correlation that can be tested with future observations. Finally, we discuss in § 6 the interpretations of our analysis. We adopt a flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmology with $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.25$ and $\sigma_8 = 0.8$ and a dimensionless Hubble constant $h = H_0/(100 \ {\rm km} \ {\rm s}^{-1}\ {\rm Mpc}^{-1})$ throughout the paper. Theoretical Framework ===================== In this section, we describe the approach to populate dark matter halos with cold baryons that are represented by the presence of Mg$^+$ ions. An implicit assumption of our halo occupation approach is that all absorbers originate in halos, rather than in metal enriched intergalactic medium (IGM) outside of individual halos. This assumption is justified by the strong correlation between absorbers and galaxies; the LRG–MgII cross-correlation function exhibits a strong signal at separations less than halo radii (@bouche_etal:04). In addition, for each absorber a galaxy is nearly always found at a separation significantly less than the typical halo radius expected given the galaxy luminosity. Finally, the multi-component nature of 2 systems demonstrates that the absorbing medium is highly clumped, in contrast to the smoother gas in the IGM. For each dark matter halo, we will specify two quantities: (1) the mean absorption strength per unit surface mass density $A_W(M)$, and (2) the mean covering factor $\cg(M)$ of the gaseous clouds. These parameters determine the conditional probability distribution of $\wr$ as a function of halo mass, $P(\wr|M)$ which, when combined with known statistics of dark matter halos, allows us to derive theoretical predictions of various statistical properties of MgII absorbers for direct comparisons with observations. Constructing the Gaseous Halo ----------------------------- A dark matter halo is defined as a collapsed and virialized object with a mean interior density equal to 200 times the background density. Thus the radius of a halo is $$\label{e.R200} R_h = R_{200} = \left[\frac{3M}{4\pi\, (200\,\bar{\rho}_m)}\right]^{1/3}.$$ The choice of $200\,\bar{\rho}_m$ is motivated by estimates of the virial radius from the spherical collapse model, which predict a value of $\sim 180$. While these estimates are idealized, they also match the halos identified in N-body simulations, from which the global properties of halos are calibrated. According to Equation (\[e.R200\]), a $10^{12}$ halo has a co-moving radius of $243$ , while $R_{200}$ for a $10^{14}$ halo is 1.1 . With this definition, all halos of mass $M$ have the same co-moving radius at any redshift. We adopt the halo mass profile of @nfw:97 and the concentration-mass relation of @bullock_etal:01 (with updated parameters from @wechsler_etal:06) to calculate the halo mass as a function of radius. We begin with the empirical result that the equivalent width $\wr$ of an absorption system is proportional to the number of absorption components, which we interpret as gas clouds or clumps encountered along the sightline through the halo [^1]. We adopt an isothermal profile with a core radius $a_h$ to approximate the mean gas density that follows $$\label{e.si_sphere} \rho_g(r) = f_g{\cal G}_0\left(r^2 + a_h^2\right)^{-1},$$ where $f_g$ is the gas fraction, $$\label{e.rho0} {\cal G}_0 = \frac{M(<R_g)/4\pi}{R_g-a_h\tan^{-1}(R_g/a_h)},$$ and $M(<\rg)$ is the mass of dark matter within the effective radius $\rg$ of the gaseous halo. Beyond $\rg$, no absorption is found. We note that an isothermal distribution of discrete gas clumps is expected to have a mean absorption strength that declines with radius. At a certain impact parameter the mean number of clouds per line of sight will rapidly decline and become negligible (see, e.g., Figure 1 in @chelouche_etal:07). We approximate this effect by creating an effective gas radius, $\rg$, beyond which no gas clumps are present. Considering the total absorption equivalent width $\wr$ as a sum over all clumps encountered along a sightline leads to $$\begin{aligned} \label{e.path_length} \label{e.w_rho} \wr(\pb|M) &=& W_0\times\left[\frac{2\sigma_{\rm cl}}{M_{\rm cl}}\int_0^{\sqrt{R_g^2-\pb^2}} {\rho}_g(\sqrt{\pb^2 + l^2})\,dl\right] \\ &=& \left(\frac{W_0\,\sigma_{\rm cl}\,f_g}{M_{\rm cl}}\right) \frac{2{\cal G}_0}{\sqrt{\pb^2 + a_h^2}}\tan^{-1}\sqrt{\frac{R_g^2 - \pb^2}{\pb^2 + a_h^2}},\end{aligned}$$ where $s$ is the impact parameter of the sightline with respect to the center of the halo, $\sigma_{\rm cl}$ and $M_{\rm cl}$ are the cross section and mean mass of individual gas clumps, and $W_0$ is the absorption per clump. It is clear that the parameters that control the relation between impact parameter and $\wr$, such as the gas fraction $f_g$, and the mean absorption strength $W_0$ and cross-section $\sigma_{\rm cl}$ of individual clumps, are degenerate. We express their product as a single free parameter $$\label{e.a_w_defn} A_W\equiv \frac{W_0\,\sigma_{\rm cl}\,f_g}{M_{\rm cl}},$$ which represents the mean absorption equivalent width per unit surface mass density of the cold gas. In the limit that all the components of the absorption line are optically thin, $A_W$ would be a measure of the mean particle density of Mg$^+$ ions. Some fraction of the lines will be optically thick, however, so we are unable to constrain the density from the values of $A_W$. The relation between the predicted absorption equivalent width $W_r$ at impact parameter $s$ of a given halo is described by $$\label{e.w_rho2} \wr(\pb|M) = A_W(M)\frac{2 {\cal G}_0}{\sqrt{\pb^2 + a_h^2}}\tan^{-1}\sqrt{\frac{R_g^2 - \pb^2}{\pb^2 + a_h^2}}.$$ Equation (\[e.w\_rho2\]) shows that if the fraction of cold gas and its properties do not change across all halo masses, then $A_W$ is expected to be a constant and the total mean equivalent width is expected to increase with halo mass due to the larger gas mass in more massive halos. We choose a value of $a_h=0.2\rg$, noting that our results are insensitive to the exact choice for this parameter. We set $\rg = 80$ comoving (50 physical at $z=0.6$) for halos of mass $10^{12}$ . The gas radius scales as $\rg = 80 (M/10^{12})^{1/3}$ , the same scaling as the halo radius in equation (\[e.R200\]). With this normalization, the gas radius is roughly one third of the halo radius for all halo masses. The choice of $50$ for our fiducial radius is motivated by observations of the radial extent to which 2 absorption of $\wr\ge 0.3$ Å is detected around $L_\ast$ galaxies (e.g., @steidel:93). We will demonstrate in § 5 that the value of $\rgas$ makes distinct predictions for the distribution of impact parameters, and that our choice for $\rgas$ matches available observations well. The Conditional Probability Distribution of $\wr$—A Smooth Gaseous Halo Model ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To construct the conditional probability distribution of $\wr$, $P(\wr|M)$, we consider the probability distribution of a random line of sight intercepting a halo at impact parameter $\pb$ and the mean absorption expected at the impact parameter $\pb$. For a random line of sight, the probability that a sightline passes through a halo of mass $M$ with impact parameter $\pb$ is $$\label{e.prho} P(\pb|M) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 2\pb/ \rg^2 & {\rm if\ \ } \pb \le \rg \\ 0 & {\rm if\ \ } \pb > \rg . \\ \end{array} \right.$$ The distribution of $\wr$ is related to the distribution of impact parameters according to $$\label{e.pW_prhob} P(\wr|M)d\wr = \cg(M)P(\pb|M)d\pb,$$ where $\cg$ is the total probability of detecting an absorber in a halo of mass $M$, which may be less than unity. This integrated probability that a sight line through a halo yields an absorber is governed by two physical quantities: the mean covering fraction of cold gas per halo and the fraction of halos that host cold gas clouds. These two quantities are degenerate, and we parameterize their product with the quantity $\cg$. From equations (\[e.prho\]) and (\[e.pW\_prhob\]), the probability distribution function of equivalent widths is $$\label{e.pw} P(\wr|M) = \cg(M)\frac{2\,\pb(\wr|M)}{R_g^2}\frac{d\pb}{d\wr},$$ where $\pb(\wr|M)$ is the inversion of equation (\[e.w\_rho2\]), which is performed numerically. The derivative of $\pb$ with respect to $\wr$ is $$\label{e.dpdW} \frac{d\pb}{d\wr} = \left(2A_W{\cal G}_0\right)^{-1} \left[\frac{\pb\times\tan^{-1}x}{(\pb^2 + a_h^2)^{3/2}} + \frac{1+x^2}{\sqrt{\pb^2 + a_h^2}} \frac{(a_h^2 + R_g^2)(\pb\times x)}{(R_g^2 - \pb^2)(a_h^2 + \pb^2)}\right]^{-1},$$ where $x\equiv \sqrt{(R_g^2 - \pb^2)/(a_h^2 + \pb^2)}$. Instead of parameterizing the mass dependence of $\cg$ using power-laws or polynomials, we adopt a non-parametric approach and specify the values of $\cg$ at four different masses and spline interpolate between them. Thus, the form of $\cg$ is fully non-parametric. The four mass values, $M_1$ though $M_4$ are $\log M_i = 10.0$, $11.33$, $12.66$, and $14.0$. We denote the four parameters of the $\cg$ function as $\kappa_1$, $\kappa_2$, $\kappa_3$, and $\kappa_4$. We perform the interpolation in $\log M$ and $\log \cg$ and extrapolate to higher and lower masses. In this smooth gaseous halo model, which we will refer to as the "classical" model, we adopt a double power law to account for the mass dependence of the mean absorption per unit surface mass density $A_W$, i.e., $$\label{e.A_W} A_W(M) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} A_0\, M_{12}^{\aaa} & \hspace{1in}{\rm if\ \ } M_{12}\le 1 \\ A_0\, M_{12}^{\aab} & \hspace{1in}{\rm if\ \ } M_{12}> 1. \\ \end{array} \right.$$ As a result, this classical model contains seven free parameters to be constrained by the data. Three govern the amount of absorption as a function of halo mass, $A_0$, $\aaa$, $\aab$, and four characterize the mass dependence of gas covering fraction $\kappa_1$-$\kappa_4$. In summary, the gas density profile determines the relative absorption between different impact parameters in a halo—the density profile sets the <span>*shape*</span> of $P(\wr|M)$. The relative absorption between halos of different masses is determined by $A_W$; at $s=0$, the line of sight directly through the center of a halo, the absorption scales as $\wr(0|M) \simeq M_{12}^{1/3}(A_W/10.9)$ where $A_W$ is in units of ($h$Åcm$^2$/gm). The incidence of the absorption is set by $\cg$. Some sightlines that pass through a halo will encounter no absorbing gas, either due to the fact that the absorbing gas is highly clumpy and the covering fraction is low or due to the fact that the halo does not contain cold gas. Incorporating a Cold-Mode/Hot-Mode Transition --------------------------------------------- As we summarized in § 1, the MgII absorbers are known to originate in primarily cool, photo-ionized gas. Recent numerical simulations show that stable shocks develop as gas accretes onto a dark matter halo, and above a critical mass threshold all gas is shock heated to the virial temperature or above. At low mass scales, however, gas accreted onto halos is not shock heated, but remains cold as it sinks to the center of the halo (e.g., @keres_etal:05). @dekel_birnboim:06 demonstrate that this is due to the gas cooling time being too short with respect to the compression time in low mass halos, thus shocks are not stable at any radius within the halo. It is therefore expected that halos above a certain mass scale may not contribute significantly to the observed MgII absorbers due to shock heating of their gas. In this second scenario, we include a transitional mass scale, above which the gas becomes predominantly shock-heated and unable to contribute to 2 absorption. We denote the shock radius $\rshock$. The absorption efficiency at $r<\rshock$ is reduced to a fraction $f_{\rm cold}$, which represents the fraction of gas that is cold within the shock radius relative to gas outside the shock. For impact parameters smaller than the shock radius, equation (\[e.w\_rho2\]) is modified as the following, $$\label{e.w_rho_shock} \wr(\pb|M) = \wr(\pb|M)_{(\rshock=0)} - (1-f_{\rm cold})A_W\frac{2 {\cal G}_0}{\sqrt{\pb^2 + a_h^2}}\tan^{-1} \sqrt{\frac{\rshock^2 - \pb^2}{\pb^2 + a_h^2}},$$ where the first term on the left hand side is the result from equation (\[e.w\_rho2\]), in which $\rshock=0$. Equation (\[e.dpdW\]) is calculated for $\pb<\rshock$ in the same manner. Figure \[pw\_curves\] shows $P(\wr)$ (normalized to $\cg=1$) for halos of $10^{11.5}$ (left panel) and $10^{13}$ (right panel). The value of $A_W$ is set such that a sightline at an impact parameter of $R_g/2$ through a $10^{12}$ halo yields an equivalent width of 1.5 Å for comparison purpose. In each panel, we present three different probability distribution functions (PDFs). The dotted curve shows equation (\[e.pw\]), which represents the $\wr$ distribution for a continuous gas density profile with no shock. As the impact parameter approaches the edge of the halo, $\wr$ becomes small. It is more likely to go through at halo at large impact parameters, but the projected density drops steeply as $\pb$ approached $\rg$, thus $P(\wr)=0$ at $\wr=0$. The mode of the distribution occurs at $\pb \sim 0.9\,R_g$, and at larger $\wr$ the curve follows $\wr^{-3}$. The distribution reaches a maximum value of $\wr\sim 3.6$ Å at $\pb=0$. The dashed curve shows the distribution of equivalent widths for a halo with $\rshock = 0.3\,R_g$, and $\fcold=5\%$. The primary effect of shock heated gas in the inner sphere is to reduce the maximum $\wr$. In the case of a $10^{11.5}$ halo, the largest equivalent width is reduced by a factor of two. For $\pb<\rshock$, $P(\wr)$ has a very different form. As $\pb$ falls just inside the shock radius, $W$ decreases rapidly. At $\pb\sim \rshock/2$, $\wr(\pb)$ reaches a minimum value as the small fraction of cold gas within $\rshock$ accumulates enough to contribute to the total absorption. The minimum value of $\wr$ depends on $\fcold$, but around the minimum, the derivative $d\wr/d\pb$ becomes small, producing a sharp feature in the total $P(\wr)$ curve at $\wr\sim 1$ Å. This feature is even more pronounced in the PDF for the higher mass halo (right panel), also with $\rshock = 0.3R_g$. The sharp feature is due to the idealized nature of the calculation. In practice, the propagation of the shocks is unlikely to be spherically symmetric, and a halo of Poisson-distributed clouds will also smear out this feature. To facilitate the calculations, however, we approximate the distribution of $\wr(\pb<\rshock)$ as a Gaussian centered on $\mu_W = \wr(\pb=\rshock/2)$ with width $\sigma_W = [\wr(\rshock)/2 - \wr(0)]/2$. The amplitude of the Gaussian function is set by the fraction of the cross section within the shock radius, which for $\rshock = 0.3\,R_g$ is $9\%$. The Gaussian function is then added to the PDF for $\pb > \rshock$. For this shocked halo model, the probability distribution is $$\begin{aligned} \label{e.pw_gaussian} P(\wr|M) & = & \cg(1-f_{\sigma})\frac{\pb(\wr|M)}{R_g^2}\frac{d\pb}{d\wr} + \nonumber \\ & & \frac{\cg f_{\sigma}}{\sqrt{2\pi\sigma_W^2}} \exp\left[\frac{-(\wr-\mu_W)^2}{2\sigma_W^2}\right],\,\,\, \wr\le W_{\rm max},\end{aligned}$$ where $f_{\sigma} = \rshock^2/R_g^2$ is the probability that a sight line has an impact parameter within $\rshock$, and $W_{\rm max}=max[\wr(\rshock),\wr(0)]$ from equation (\[e.w\_rho\]). We note that $P(\wr)=0$ for $\wr>W_{\rm max}$. The results are shown in the solid lines in both panels of Figure \[pw\_curves\]. Instead of a sharp peak in $P(\wr)$, the smooth model creates a 'shoulder' in the PDF, smoothing out the discontinuity in the dashed curve. The parameters of the Guassian are chosen such that this shoulder tracks the peak in the PDF as $\rshock$ changes. In the one-dimensional simulations of @birnboim_dekel:03 and @dekel_birnboim:07, shock heating first become stable at the inner regions of the halo, then propagates outward as the halo evolves and becomes more massive. Thus at a given epoch, the width of the transition region in their simulations is roughly a factor of $2-5$ in halo mass. In more realistic three-dimensional simulations, but in which the shock fronts are not fully resolved, the fraction of cold gas decreases linearly with $\log M$ over $\sim 1$ dex in mass (@keres_etal:05 [@birnboim_etal:07]). We parameterize the mass dependence of $\rshock$ as $$\label{e.rshock} \frac{\rshock}{\rg} = \rs0 + \ashock\log_{10} \m12,$$ and restrict $\rshock/\rg$ to be no smaller then $0$ and no larger than $1$. We will refer to the "transition scale" as the mass at which $\rshock/\rg =0.5$. At low masses the shock radius is zero, while in the transition region the fraction of the gas radius that is within the shocked core increases linearly with $\log M$ until $\rshock=\rg$. For halos with $\rshock=\rg$, the equivalent width is calculated as $$\wr(\pb|M) = f_{\rm cold}A_W\frac{2{\cal G}_0}{\sqrt{\pb^2 + a_h^2}}\tan^{-1} \sqrt{\frac{\rg^2 - \pb^2}{\pb^2 + a_h^2}}.$$ Nominally, this "transition" model has eight free parameters: $A_W$, $\kappa_1$ through $\kappa_4$, $\rs0$, $\ashock$, and $\fcold$. In this scenario, we leave $A_W$ to be invariant with halo mass and attribute relevant mass-dependent gas fraction to $\rshock$ and $\fcold$, in order to simplify the model analysis. Removing freedom from $A_W$ in favor of $\rshock$ is beneficial in that it highlights the differences between the two scenarios and allows us to isolate features from each model. As we will show in § 4, the classical model and the transition model have distinct predictions for various statistical quantities of the MgII absorbers. These distinctions can be attributed to the different spatial distributions of the cold gas in halos of different mass, and serve as strong constraints of the models. Derivation of the Observed Statistical Properties of MgII Absorbers =================================================================== Both the frequency distribution of MgII absorbers as a function of $W_r$ and their clustering amplitude with respect to LRG are known from previous work. Here we summarize these known statistical properties from observations and derive theoretical formulae based on the two scenarios described in § 2. The Frequency Distribution Function ----------------------------------- The frequency distribution function is defined as the number of absorbers per absorption equivalent width interval per unit redshift path length. Here we combine the results from @prochter_etal:06 for $\wr>1$Å with the results from @steidel_sargent:92 for $0.3$Å $\le \wr\le 1$Å. The @prochter_etal:06 data is nearly complete ($> 95$%) over the redshift range $0.4\le z\le 2.2$ for absorbers of $W_r>1$ Å. The @steidel_sargent:92 data is complete to $W_r=0.3$ Å over the redshift range $0.2\le z\le 2.2$. For empirical measurements, we take the raw number counts from @prochter_etal:06 and divide the number counts by the total co-moving path length of all the lines of sight, $l_{\rm tot}$. The total co-moving path length is calculated by integrating the distance-redshift relation, weighted by the number of lines of sight $g(z)$ at each redshift interval $dz$ as follows, $$\label{e.comoving_path_length} l_{\rm tot} = \int dz\,g(z)\left[ \om(1+z)^3 + \Omega_\Lambda\right]^{-1/2}.$$ Equation (\[e.comoving\_path\_length\]) yields the total co-moving radial distance covered by the lines of sight to $\sim 45,000$ quasars available in SDSS DR3. The total number of absorbers is $N_{\rm abs}=4835$, with $l_{\rm tot}= 4.55\times 10^7$ . There is no systematic or cosmic variance error estimate for the frequency data, so we apply Poisson fluctuations for estimating random errors, including a $5\%$ 'systematic' uncertainty for each of the 38 bins that have at least one absorber. This additional systematic error only alters the total uncertainty for the lowest few $\wr$ bins from the Prochter et al. sample ($W_r=1-1.5$ Å) and prevents those data from driving the total $\chi^2$ when evaluating a model. For $\wr\le 1$Å, we use the results from @steidel_sargent:92. This is a much smaller sample, but is valuable for constraining the shape of $d^2N/(dWdl)$. The Steidel & Sargent measurements are scaled to those of the @prochter_etal:06 data for $1$Å$< \wr \le 1.3$Å to account for the difference in the total redshift survey paths of the two samples. To obtain theoretical predictions, we calculate the conditional probability of a halo containing an absorber of a given strength $P(\wr|M)$ as specified in § 2 for a given set of parameters. The integral of the product of the cross-section weighted halo mass function and the probability of detecting an absorber of $\wr$ in a halo of a given mass leads to the frequency of the absorbers versus $\wr$, i.e. $$\label{e.model_dndW} \fr \equiv \frac{d^2N}{d\wr\,dl} = \int dM \frac{dn}{dM} \sigma_g(M) P(\wr|M),$$ where $\sigma_g(M)=\pi \rg^2$ is the cross section of the gas halo and $dn/dM$ is the halo mass function. The frequency distribution in equation (\[e.model\_dndW\]) has units of Å$^{-1}\,($$)^{-1}$ in co-moving coordinates. We note that two scaling factors need to be accounted for before a direct comparison between empirical measurements and model predictions can be done. First, the redshift distributions of the frequency data and the bias data are different. As discussed in § 3.2 below, the bias data are limited by the redshift range for LRGs at $0.35 < z < 0.8$. We therefore must re-normalize the frequency function to the effective redshift of the B06 sample at $z=0.6$. The amplitude of the frequency function rises between $z=0.5$ and $z=1$, and the ratio of $dN/dz$ at $z=0.6$ to the full sample is 0.55. Second, the amplitude of $\fr$ based on a SDSS DR5 MgII absorber sample is found to increase by a factor of 1.1 (J. X. Prochaska, private communication). We have therefore included this correction in our empirical data for comparisons with models[^2]. The MgII–LRG Cross-Correlation Function --------------------------------------- The cross-correlation function between absorbers and galaxies along common lines of sight determines the clustering strength (and therefore the relative bias) of the absorbers with respect to the galaxies. Given the mean mass scale of the halos that host the galaxies, one can derive the mean mass scale of the halos hosting the absorbers. @bouche_etal:06 presented the projected cross-correlation function of MgII absorbers and LRGs on scales of $r_p=1-10$ . The 2 -LRG sample covers a redshift range of $0.35<z<0.8$. These authors calculate the relative bias of absorbers to LRGs by taking the ratio of absorber-LRG cross-correlation function to the LRG autocorrelation function, $$\label{e.bhat} \bhat \equiv \frac{b_W}{b_{G}} = \frac{\xi_{WG}}{\xi_{GG}}.$$ Equation (\[e.bhat\]) is only exact at large scales because it assumes linear bias, but the scale dependence of halo bias is largely independent of halo mass (@tinker_etal:05) and will cancel in the ratio. We take the absolute bias of LRGs with respect to dark matter to be $b_{\rm LRG}=1.85$ at $z=0.6$ (@white_etal:07, who adopt the same cosmology as what is assumed here), and estimate the absolute bias of the absorbers following Equation (\[e.bhat\]). To compare the models to the data, we calculate the absolute bias of absorbers and divide the calculation by $b_{LRG}$. The bias data are in four bins of $\wr$: \[0.3,1.15\] Å, \[1.15,2.0\] Å, \[2.0,2.85\] Å, and \[2.85,4.0\] Å. The highest-$\wr$ bin has little influence on the parameter constraints due to the small number of objects in that bin. When comparing models to bias data, we take the number-weighted average bias over the given range in $\wr$. The B06 sample is incomplete for $\wr<1$ Å. The true frequency distribution monotonically increases with smaller $\wr$, but the \[0.3,1.15\] Åbin is dominated by $\sim 1$ Å absorbers. When calculating $\bb$ in this bin, we introduce the same incompleteness in the model by multiplying $P(\wr|M)$ by $21.4\,(1-\wr)$ for $\wr<1$ Å. With this factor, a model that accurately re-produces the true $d^2N/(d\wr\,dl)$ data will produce a frequency distribution that matches the shape of the B06 sample. In the context of the halo model, the bias of absorbers with respect to the dark matter is equal to the mean halo bias, weighted by the probability of finding an absorber $\wr$ at mass $M$; $$\label{e.model_bias} b_W = \frac{1}{\fr} \int dM \frac{dn}{dM} \sigma_g(M) b_h(M) P(\wr|M),$$ where $b_h$ is the halo bias. For the halo mass function we use the fitting function of @warren_etal:06, while for the halo bias we use the fitting function of @tinker_etal:05. All halo properties are calculated at the effective redshift of the B06 absorber sample. The redshift range of the data is large enough such that integrating equations (\[e.model\_dndW\]) and (\[e.model\_bias\]) over redshift will yield slightly different results, but for the purpose of this study it is sufficient to choose an effective redshift for all calculations. In our subsequent analyses, the redshift evolution of $\fr$ will be used as an additional constraint on the models. Comparisons between Observations and Best-Fit Models ==================================================== The scenarios discussed in § 2 have distinct predictions for the empirical data discussed in § 3. We constrain the models using a Monte Carlo Markov Chain technique that determines the best-fit parameters based on comparisons of the data with random realizations from various model predictions. For each realization in the chain, the total $\chi^2$ is the sum of the $\chi^2$ values from both the frequency and bias data. We will refer to these quantities as $\xf$ and $\xb$, respectively. Because of the larger number of frequency data and smaller errors on those data, $\xf$ dominates the total $\chi^2$. However, the $\xf$ values should be taken with caution, because we have no true estimate of the cosmic variance. <span>ccccccccccccc</span> Classical & $33.2$ & — & — & -1.721 & -0.012 & -0.198 & -1.763 & -0.172 & -0.176 & — & 43.3 & 11.1\ Transition & $136$ & 1.02 & 1.03 & -9.27 & -0.205 & -0.006 & -0.168 & — & — & 0.061 & 19.8 & 3.5\ The Classical Gaseous Halo Model -------------------------------- As described in § 2.2, the classical model contains seven free parameters, including three that characterize the absorbing gas column, $A_W$, for halos of different mass scales and four that characterize gas covering fraction $\kappa_1$-$\kappa_4$ of individual halos. The mass dependence in $A_W$ allows the predicted $\wr$ versus impact parameter $\pb$ relation (Equation \[e.w\_rho2\]) to vary smoothly with halo mass. The best-fit parameters are listed in Table 1. Figure \[stats\] compares observational data with predictions based on the "classical" model (dotted curves). We present in panel (a) the frequency data and in panel (b) the residuals normalized by the corresponding error of each bin. The frequency data are adequately fit by this model, yielding $\xf=43.3$ for 41 data points and seven free parameters. The classical model matches the abundance of strong absorbers, $\wr>2$ Å, but at lower equivalent widths the residuals become large. Specifically, this model overproduces the number of absorbers by nearly 60% at $W \sim 0.3$ Å due to a large contribution from low-mass halos. We present the comparison for the halo bias of the absorbers in panel (c) and the inferred mean halo mass in panel (d). The bias data (points with errorbars) are derived from MgII–LRG cross-correlation measurements. The relative bias $\bhat$ derived from observations decreases from 0.8 at $\langle \wr \rangle \approx 0.8$ Å to nearly 0.4 at $\langle \wr\rangle \approx 2.4$ Å. The measured bias for $\wr\ge 2.8$ Å increases slightly to 0.5, but the number of objects in this bin is small and it has little influence on our fitting results. Using a simple mean-mass approximation, B06 infer a decrease in mean halo mass of nearly 1.5 dex over this range in $\wr$. The best-fit classical model is unable to reproduce the inverse correlation between $\bhat$ and $\wr$. As expected, the bias monotonically increases with $\wr$, placing the weakest absorbers in $M=10^{11.5}$ halos while locating the strongest absorbers in the nearly same halos as LRGs. Figures \[all\_137\]a-\[all\_137\]b present the parameter constraints for this model. In both panels, the inner and outer shaded regions show the allowed parameter range, constrained respectively by $\Delta\chi^2<1$ and $<4$ from the best-fit model. Figure \[all\_137\]a presents the constraints on the mean gas covering fraction $\cg$ as a function of halo mass. The function peaks at $\log M\approx 12$; nearly all halos of $\log M\approx 11.5-12.5$ are expected to produce an absorber if the impact parameter is less than $\rg$ to a background quasar. At lower and higher masses, $\cg$ rapidly falls off, but the constraints become weak at the extrema of the mass range. Given the constraints, there is little contribution to 2 absorption from halos more massive than $10^{13}$ and less massive than $3\times 10^{10}$. Figure \[all\_137\]b shows constraints for the absorption column $A_W(M)$. For low-mass halos, the constraints on the slope and normalization are strong; $10^{12}$ halos produce $\sim 1$Åabsorbers. The best-fit model has a single power-law, with $\aaa \approx \aab \approx -0.17$. The negative values of $\aaa$ and $\aab$ increase the absorption efficiency in lower mass halos, but not sufficiently to produce an anti-correlation between $\wr$ and $M$. A slope more negative than $-1/3$ in $A_W(M)$ versus $M$ is required to make the mean $\wr$ constant as a function of $M$, but these negative values would violate the constraints on the frequency distribution by overproducing high-$\wr$ absorbers. At $M>10^{12}$ , the constraints on $A_W$ are poor because $\cg$ falls off rapidly at these masses. There is a degeneracy between $\kappa_4$ and $\aab$; if $\cg$ falls off for $M>10^{12}$, high-$\wr$ systems can only be produced if $\aab$ is large. However, this steepens the slope of $\bb$ and these models fare even worse in comparison to the bias data. The models which produce the lowest $\xb$ have negative values of both $\aaa$ and $\aab$. Figure \[all\_137\]c shows the relative contribution to absorber counts from halos of different mass based on the best-fit model. We refer to this mass distribution as the "occupation function". The curves show three values of $\wr$: 0.5 Å, 1 Å, and 2 Å, and the relative areas under the curves represent the relative number of absorbers. The $y$-axis, in arbitrary units, is the probability of detecting an absorber of $\wr$ in a halo of mass $M$, i.e., $P(\wr|M)P(M)$, where $P(M)$ is the probability that a given line of sight intersects a halo of mass $M$ based on a cross-section weighted halo mass function, $\sigma_g(M)\,dn/dM$. These curves have the Gaussian-type shape of the $\cg$ function, with the sharp edges near the peak resulting from the mass range over which $\cg$ is josephsmith@example.com. The mass dispersion is $\sim 1$ dex in $\log M$ for all three curves. The modes of each curve move to higher mass, producing the increasing trend of $\wr$ with $M$ shown in Figure \[stats\]d. In summary, the "classical" model with a smooth gaseous halo <span>*cannot*</span> fit both the frequency data and the bias data simultaneously. Under this scenario, more massive halos are expected to contain more absorbing gas, resulting in a positive correlation between $\wr$ and halo mass $M$. Forcing the mean absorption $A_W$ per halo to decline steeply with increasing halo mass would improve the model fit to the bias data, but at the same time it would over-produce the abundance of strong ($\wr>2$ Å) absorbers. The Significance of Shock-Heated Gas in Massive Halos ----------------------------------------------------- The best-fit parameters of the transition model are also listed in Table 1. This transition model has eight free parameters: $A_W$, $\kappa_1$ through $\kappa_4$, $\rs0$, $\ashock$, and $\fcold$. As discussed in § 2.3, we have left $A_W$ to be invariant with halo mass and attributed relevant mass-dependent gas fraction to $\rshock$ and $\fcold$. Comparisons between observations and predictions based on the transition model are also presented in Figure \[stats\] (solid curves). The addition of the cold-hot transition produces a best-fit model that precisely fits the frequency data over the entire $W_r$ range, including those points at $W<1$Å, with $\xf=19.8$. The model also reproduces the anti-correlation between $\wr$ and $\bhat$ for $\wr<2.5$ Å, shown in Figure \[stats\]c. Although the slope of the trend is not as strong as that seen in the B06 measurements, $\xb=3.5$ for four data points. The relative bias in the model decreases from $\bhat=0.7$ at $\wr=0.4$Å to $\bhat=0.55$ for $\wr=2$Å. This declining trend in the absorber bias is due to a decrease in the mean halo mass with increasing $\wr$ (Figure \[stats\]d). The mean mass falls by nearly a decade from $\wr=0.4$Å to $\wr=4$Å.[^3] The total $\chi^2$ for this model is 23.3 for 37 degrees of freedom. In a purely statistical sense this suggests that the model has too many free parameters. However, we note once again that the errors on $\fr$ are estimates only, and we wish to include as much freedom in the model to prevent the frequency data from driving the constraints on the halo occupation. In this sense, $\xb$ is the most relevant quantity, noting that eight free parameters is barely sufficient to reproduce the bias measurements. Figures \[all\_136\]a and \[all\_136\]b present the parameter constraints for the transition model. The covering fraction is narrower and sharper than the classical model: $\cg=1$ for halos of $\log M\approx 11.5-12.5$ and cuts off sharply at lower masses. Over nearly a decade in halo mass, all models with $\Delta\chi^2<4$ yield $\cg=1$. However, the transition from cold mode ($\rshock/\rg=0$) to hot mode ($\rshock/\rg=1$) begins at $M\simeq 10^{11}$ and ends at $M\simeq 10^{12}$ . This indicates that massive halos of $\log M\ge 12$ contribute to the observed MgII statistics through the presence of cold flow in the shock-heated halos. The constraints on the cold fraction within the shock are strong, with the best-fit model yielding $\fcold=0.06$ with an allowed range of $\pm 0.03$ for models with $\Delta\chi^2<4$. Both the transitional mass scale and cold gas fraction in massive halos agree well with the simulations of @keres_etal:05 and @birnboim_etal:07. In the post-shock regime $\log M>12.5$, the constraints on the covering factor are poor; models with a low $\kappa_4$ yield better fits to the frequency data while high covering factors at $10^{14}$ produce higher bias factors and lower $\xb$. Figure \[all\_136\]c shows the occupation functions for the best-fit model. For halos of $M = 10^{11}-10^{12}$, the absorber counts rises as $\cg$ increases with halo mass as shown in panel (a). For $\wr=0.5$ Å, the occupation function peaks are $10^{12}$ , then abruptly drops when $\rshock = \rg$ and all halos enter the hot phase. For $\wr=1$ and 2 Å, the peak in the occupation functions occur at $10^{11.7}$ and $10^{11.5}$ , respectively. This trend is due to the inside-out nature of the heating; higher-$\wr$ systems are produced at smaller impact parameters and the shock radius envelopes that radius at lower halo masses. Above $10^{12}$ , the occupation has a tail out to $10^{14}$ . In the best-fit model, $\kappa_4 = 0.67$, implying that a significant fraction of cluster-sized halos contain some cold gas with a high covering fraction. However, we note again that the constraint on $\kappa_4$ is poor due to the low frequency of such massive halos. For $\wr\ge 1$ Å absorbers, halos in the post-shock regime do not initially have enough gas to produce absorbers of this strength, and so the distribution of halo masses occupied by these absorbers becomes bimodal; only at $M>10^{12.5-13}$ is there enough cold gas to produce absorbers of this strength. For $\wr=2$ Å, for example, halos between $10^{11.6}$ and $10^{13.2}$ halos do not produce strong absorbers. This bimodal distribution is what causes $\bhat$ to increase for $\wr>3$ Å, while $\logmbar$ remains constant in Figure \[stats\]; bias increases non-linearly with mass, weighting high-mass halos more in $\bhat$ than in $\logmbar$. In summary, the transition model can simultaneously re-produce the observed frequency data and bias data of MgII absorbers. The anti-correlation between $\wr$ and $M$ in the transition model is produced through two mechanisms. First, as the shock propagates outward from the center of a massive halo, high-$\wr$ systems are no longer produced, but low-$\wr$ systems are produced <span>*more frequently*</span> because sight lines at low impact parameters ($\pb\le\rshock$) now produce weaker absorbers. This is demonstrated in Figure \[all\_136\]c by the location of the cutoff in the occupation function—as $\wr$ increases the location of the cutoff moves to lower masses. Second, the small amount of cold gas in the post-shock regime (masses at which $\rshock=\rgas$) yields mostly low-$\wr$ absorbers in high mass halos. An instantaneous transition between the cold-mode and hot-mode with a non-zero cold fraction could produce a weak $\wr-M$ anti-correlation. A broad transition region (a small value of $\ashock$) with $\fcold=0$ could also produce a weak anti-correlation. In this model the two effects work together to fit the measurements. Additional Observables Predicted by the Models ============================================== We have demonstrated that the transition model can re-produce both the observed frequency distribution function and the MgII–LRG relative bias data. Given the known $W_r(s|M)$ constrained by the data in §4, and known mass distribution function of the dark matter halos, we can also predict (1) the correlation between $\wr$ and galaxy impact parameter $s$, and (2) the impact parameter distribution of MgII absorbing galaxies $P(s)$. Here we derive these properties on the basis of the gaseous halo model described in § 2 and the best-fit parameters constrained by the frequency and bias data in Table 1. The Absorber $\wr$ vs. Galaxy Impact Parameter Correlation ---------------------------------------------------------- To estimate the correlation between $\wr$ and impact parameter, as well as the distribution of impact parameters, we adopt the center of each halo as the location of the corresponding absorbing galaxy. At a given impact parameter, the distribution of equivalent widths is then determined by $$\begin{aligned} \label{e.dW_rhob} P(\wr|\pb) & = & \int dM \frac{dn}{dM} \sigma_g(M)\,P(\wr|M,\pb)\,P(\pb|M) \\ & = & \int dM \frac{dn}{dM} \sigma_g(M)\,\delta(\wr(\pb|M)-\wr)\,\kappa_g(M)\,P(\pb|M) \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $P(\pb|M)$ is the probability distribution of impact parameters of random sightlines defined in equation (\[e.prho\]) and $\delta(x)$ is a delta function. From equation (\[e.dW\_rhob\]), the total number of absorbers at a given impact parameter—and thus the distribution of impact parameters as a function of $\pb$—is obtained be integrating $P(\wr|\pb)$ over all $\wr$. To use galaxy-absorber pair statistics to constrain the model parameters requires a MgII absorber survey carried out along the sightlines where the galaxies positions are known <span>*a priori*</span>. Typical absorbing galaxy studies focus on searching for galaxies that give rise to known absorbers. These galaxy-absorber pairs collected from these studies are not suitable for constraining the covering fraction of MgII gas random halos because sightlines that do not encounter a MgII absorber are by design excluded from the sample. Therefore, the impact parameter distribution established based on these <span>*absorber oriented*</span> studies is expected to be skewed. A galaxy–MgII absorber pair sample established in a <span>*galaxy oriented*</span> survey is only mentioned in Tripp & Bowen (2005), but the sample is small and details are not available in the literature. In the subsequent discussion, we have compiled an <span>*ad hoc*</span> sample of 133 galaxy–MgII absorber pairs from the literature (@steidel:95; @kacprzak_etal:07; @bergeron_boisse:91; B06), in which the galaxies are found for known MgII absorbers. The mean redshift of these samples is $z\sim 0.6$. We note a potential bias in this heterogeneous pair sample. Because of different selection criteria, these pairs are most likely incomplete at impact parameters $s\lesssim 15$ due to blending of the galaxy light with the QSO. The likelihood of mis-identifying the associated galaxy at $s\gtrsim 60$ is non-negligible, if the true associated galaxy is too faint to be detected. While we cannot address the covering fraction of MgII gas in typical galaxies, this pair sample offers a test of our model based on the observed $\wr$-$\log\pb$ distribution of known absorbers. This sample also offers an important consistency check on our choice of gas radius. In Figures \[rhob\]a and \[rhob\]b, we compare the predicted $\wr$-$\log\pb$ relations from the classical and shocked halo models to observational data. Each point with error bars in Figure \[rhob\] is the mean and dispersion from every 10 galaxy-absorber pairs, ordered by $\log\pb$. It should be noted that the error bars do not represent the error in the mean but rather the variance in $\wr$ at fixed $\pb$, which is a physically meaningful quantity that can be compared to models as well. The data show a weak trend of decreasing $\wr$ with larger impact parameter, with $\wr \sim 1.6$ Å at $-2.3 < \log \pb <-1.6$ and $\wr \sim
{'source': 'arXiv_out/0709'}