2020
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/staa295
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An analysis of galaxy cluster mis-centring using cosmological hydrodynamic simulations

Abstract: The location of a galaxy cluster's centroid is typically derived from observations of the galactic and/or gas component of the cluster, but these typically deviate from the true centre. This can produce bias when observations are combined to study average cluster properties. Using data from the BAHAMAS cosmological hydrodynamic simulations we study this bias in both two and three dimensions for 2000 clusters over the 10 13 − 10 15 M mass range. We quantify and model the offset distributions between observation… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The KS profile is the correct model for undisturbed gas that is in hydrostatic equilibrium in an NFW halo, but this state will clearly be violated in the presence of AGN feedback. It was shown in Yan et al (2020) that the KS model could provide a reasonable match to gas-density profiles in the bahamas simulations, but it is likely that the polytropic link between density and pressure is not respected in the presence of feedback (Battaglia et al 2012a,b). It is probable that a better model could be generated by either changing the gas profile, for example by explicitly including heated gas, or by weakening the links between the density and pressure modelling.…”
Section: Joint Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The KS profile is the correct model for undisturbed gas that is in hydrostatic equilibrium in an NFW halo, but this state will clearly be violated in the presence of AGN feedback. It was shown in Yan et al (2020) that the KS model could provide a reasonable match to gas-density profiles in the bahamas simulations, but it is likely that the polytropic link between density and pressure is not respected in the presence of feedback (Battaglia et al 2012a,b). It is probable that a better model could be generated by either changing the gas profile, for example by explicitly including heated gas, or by weakening the links between the density and pressure modelling.…”
Section: Joint Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this would necessitate having reliable measurements of individual halo masses and would require modelling effects such as halo mis-centring (e.g. Yan et al 2020). It would also need to be ascertained whether the halo model can be trusted for calculations that are binned in halo mass and how problems with these calculations compare to problems in the standard when integrated over all halo masses.…”
Section: Important Halo Massesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In appendix.C, we discuss how the parameter 𝜂 mc would influence the results and find 𝜂 mc = 0.2 is an optimal choice. Further analysis may adopt more complicated and more realistic description of mis-centering (e.g Yan et al (2020)). With higher resolution CMB experiments such as ACT, SPT, and CMB-S4, the tSZ data alone will have constraining power for both 𝑐 and the mis-centering effect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By comparing best-fitting mass with the true cluster mass, they find mass biases of M/M true = −8.9 +0.3 −0.2 per cent, and −6.4 +0.3 −0.2 per cent for the NFW and Einasto profile, respectively. Yan et al (2020) analyse the same BAHAMAS catalogue by fitting an NFW model to the density profile of all particles in a cluster and found a mean mass bias of −10 per cent. These studies are based on weak lensing profiles, which is an unbiased tracer of the cluster masses, while the present study uses biased tracers like galaxy or gas.…”
Section: R E S U Lt Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, even with these simulations, the complexities of substructure, morphology, and small-scale physical processes, such as active galactic nuclei (AGN) feedback (Gitti, Brighenti & McNamara 2012) and gas clumping (Nagai & Lau 2011), hinder the accuracy of many cluster mass estimates. Yan et al (2020) used hydrodynamical simulations to assess the effect of cluster miscentring on mass determinations.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%