AI 中文总结
研究银河系卫星群体暗物质密度分布，通过动力学建模与CDM流体动力学模拟对比，在可观测半径评估模拟斜率，发现观测和模拟星系有质量依赖的核心形成趋势，多数系统模拟与观测相符，固定半径评估斜率改善一致性，Willman 1是异常值。
AI 中文摘要
尖点-核心问题仍然是ΛCDM模型的关键挑战。以往比较模拟和观测中的内暗物质晕斜率存在方法不匹配问题。本文通过动力学建模推断银河系矮卫星的暗物质密度分布，并与CDM流体动力学模拟严格对比。使用NIHAO和FIRE-2套件，在可靠性范围内用四种方法对比16颗银河系卫星的模拟和动力学推断分布。在可观测半径评估模拟斜率，直接对比匹配恒星质量的分布。观测和模拟星系都有质量依赖的核心形成趋势，多数系统模拟分布与观测在约1σ内相符，固定物理半径评估斜率显著改善了流体动力学模拟和动力学模型的一致性，但Willman 1仍是未解决的异常值。
英文摘要
The cusp-core problem remains a key challenge for the $Λ$CDM model. Historically, comparing inner dark matter halo slopes ($d\logρ/d\log r$) from simulations and observations has suffered from a methodological mismatch: evaluating slopes at different radii creates apparent tensions due to inconsistent definitions rather than genuine physical differences. We rigorously compare dark matter density profiles of Milky Way (MW) dwarf satellites inferred from dynamical modelling against CDM hydrodynamical simulations. Using the NIHAO and FIRE-2 suites ($M_{\star} \sim 10^3$-$10^{11}\,\rm M_\odot$), we confront simulated profiles with dynamical inferences of 16 MW satellites across four methods, strictly within their reliability limits. Crucially, we evaluate simulated slopes at observationally accessible radii, directly comparing profiles at matched stellar mass. Both observed and simulated galaxies exhibit a mass-dependent core-formation trend: inner slopes rise from cuspy values ($\approx -1.5$) at $M_{\star} \sim 10^5\,\rm M_\odot$ to core-like values ($\approx 0$ to $-0.4$) at $M_{\star} \sim 10^8\,\rm M_\odot$. Efficient core formation begins at $M_{\star} \gtrsim 10^6\,\rm M_\odot$ for centrals, where satellites display increased scatter consistent with tidal disruption. Simulated profiles agree with observations within $\lesssim 1σ$ for most systems, outperforming a NFW profile. Furthermore, differing observational models present scatter for a given system comparable to the simulation-to-observation offset. Evaluating dark matter density slopes at fixed physical radii significantly improves agreement between hydrodynamical simulations and dynamical models, revealing no clear tension when comparing profiles at fixed stellar mass, but Willman\,1 remains an unresolved outlier.
Comments20 pages, 11 figures, submitted to A&A
