The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Dynamical Masses and Scaling Relations for a Sample of Massive Sunyaev-Zel'dovich Effect Selected Galaxy Clusters $^,$

Sifón, Cristobál; Menanteau, F.; Hasselfield, Matthew; Marriage, Tobias A.; Hughes, John P.; Barrientos, L. Felipe; González, Jorge; Infante, L.; Addison, Graeme E.; Baker, A. J.; Battaglia, Nick; Bond, J. R.; Crichton, Devin; Das, Sudeep; Devlin, Mark J.; Dunkley, Joanna; Dünner, Rolando; Gralla, Megan; Hajian, Amir; Hilton, Matthew; Hincks, Adam D.; Kosowsky, Arthur; Marsden, Danica; Moodley, Kavilan; Niemack, Michael D.; Nolta, Michael R.; Page, Lyman A.; Partridge, B.; Reese, Erik D.; Sehgal, Neelima; Sievers, Jonathan; Spergel, David N.; Staggs, Suzanne T.; Thornton, Robert J.; Trac, Hy; Wollack, Edward J.

doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/1/25

Cited by 112 publications

(185 citation statements)

References 129 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The clusters span an interval 0.3 < ∼ z < ∼ 1.5. Sifón et al (2013) presented the dynamical analysis of a sample of 16 SZ selected massive clusters detected with the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) over a 455 deg 2 area of the southern sky. 60 member galaxies on average per cluster were observed with deep multi-object spectroscopic observations.…”

Section: Source Catalogsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This size can be achieved only relying on a number of different source catalogs. 30 clusters are from Girardi & Mezzetti (2001) Mazure et al (1996), and 3 from Sifón et al (2013). Rykoff et al (2014) applied the redMaPPer (red-sequence Matched-filter Probabilistic Percolation), a red-sequence cluster finder designed for large photometric surveys, to ∼ 10000 deg 2 of SDSS DR8 data.…”

Section: Merged Catalogmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

CoMaLit – IV. Evolution and self-similarity of scaling relations with the galaxy cluster mass

Sereno¹,

Ettori²

2015

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scaling of observable properties of galaxy clusters with mass evolves with time. Assessing the role of the evolution is crucial to study the formation and evolution of massive halos and to avoid biases in the calibration. We present a general method to infer the mass and the redshift dependence, and the time-evolving intrinsic scatter of the mass-observable relations. The procedure self-calibrates the redshift dependent completeness function of the sample. The intrinsic scatter in the mass estimates used to calibrate the relation is considered too. We apply the method to the scaling of mass M ∆ versus line of sight galaxy velocity dispersion σ v , optical richness, X-ray luminosity, L X , and Sunyaev-Zel'dovich signal. Masses were calibrated with weak lensing measurements. The measured relations are in good agreement with time and mass dependencies predicted in the self-similar scenario of structure formation. The lone exception is the L X -M ∆ relation whose time evolution is negative in agreement with formation scenarios with additional radiative cooling and uniform preheating at high redshift. The intrinsic scatter in the σ v -M ∆ relation is notably small, of order of 14 per cent. Robust predictions on the observed properties of the galaxy clusters in the CLASH sample are provided as cases of study. Catalogs and scripts are publicly available at

show abstract

Section: Source Catalogsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Merged Catalogmentioning

confidence: 99%

CoMaLit – IV. Evolution and self-similarity of scaling relations with the galaxy cluster mass

Sereno¹,

Ettori²

2015

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Intrinsic scatter between the relevant observable properties of clusters and between mass measurements and underlying halo mass is therefore a key parameter that many studies attempt to constrain (e.g. Okabe et al 2010bOkabe et al , 2014bBecker & Kravtsov 2011;Bahé, McCarthy & King 2012;Marrone et al 2012;Mahdavi et al 2013;Sifón et al 2013;Mulroy et al 2014;Rozo et al 2015;Saliwanchik et al 2015). Cluster mass measurement methods used for calibration studies must therefore permit measurements of individual cluster masses in order to characterise the full distribution of cluster mass around the mean relation between mass and observable mass proxy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

LoCuSS: weak-lensing mass calibration of galaxy clusters

Okabe

Smith

2016

Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.

156

179

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present weak-lensing mass measurements of 50 X-ray luminous galaxy clusters at 0.15 z 0.3, based on uniform high quality observations with Suprime-Cam mounted on the 8.2-m Subaru telescope. We pay close attention to possible systematic biases, aiming to control them at the ∼ < 4 per cent level. The dominant source of systematic bias in weak-lensing measurements of the mass of individual galaxy clusters is contamination of background galaxy catalogues by faint cluster and foreground galaxies. We extend our conservative method for selecting background galaxies with (V − i ′ ) colours redder than the red sequence of cluster members to use a colour-cut that depends on cluster-centric radius. This allows us to define background galaxy samples that suffer 1 per cent contamination, and comprise 13 galaxies per square arcminute. Thanks to the purity of our background galaxy catalogue, the largest systematic that we identify in our analysis is a shape measurement bias of 3 per cent, that we measure using simulations that probe weak shears upto g = 0.3. Our individual cluster mass and concentration measurements are in excellent agreement with predictions of the mass-concentration relation. Equally, our stacked shear profile is in excellent agreement with the Navarro Frenk and White profile. Our new LoCuSS mass measurements are consistent with the CCCP and CLASH surveys, and in tension with the Weighing the Giants at ∼ 1 − 2σ significance. Overall, the consensus at z 0.3 that is emerging from these complementary surveys represents important progress for cluster mass calibration, and augurs well for cluster cosmology.

show abstract

“…Some methods use the galaxies obtained during the first step of the cluster overdensity search via the FOF algorithm (e.g., Yang et al 2005b;Yang et al 2007;Muñoz-Cuartas & Müller 2012;Tempel et al 2014;Pearson et al in preparation). Other commonly used methods are to select galaxies within a specified region of the colour-magnitude space (e.g., Saro et al 2013) or in projected phase space (e.g., von der Linden et al 2007;Wojtak et al 2009;Mamon et al 2013;Gifford & Miller 2013;Sifón et al 2013;Pearson et al in preparation). Though these techniques generate an impression of which galaxies are associated with a cluster, deducing which galaxies are true members of the cluster is often problematic due to interloping galaxies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Galaxy Cluster Mass Reconstruction Project – II. Quantifying scatter and bias using contrasting mock catalogues

Old

Wojtak

Mamon

et al. 2015

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is the second in a series in which we perform an extensive comparison of various galaxy-based cluster mass estimation techniques that utilise the positions, velocities and colours of galaxies. Our aim is to quantify the scatter, systematic bias and completeness of cluster masses derived from a diverse set of 25 galaxy-based methods using two contrasting mock galaxy catalogues based on a sophisticated halo occupation model and a semi-analytic model. Analysing 968 clusters, we find a wide range in the RMS errors in log M 200c delivered by the different methods (0.18 to 1.08 dex, i.e., a factor of ∼1.5 to 12), with abundance matching and richness methods providing the best results, irrespective of the input model assumptions. In addition, certain methods produce a significant number of catastrophic cases where the mass is under-or over-estimated by a factor greater than 10. Given the steeply falling high-mass end of the cluster mass function, we recommend that richness or abundance matching-based methods are used in conjunction with these methods as a sanity check for studies selecting high mass clusters. We see a stronger correlation of the recovered to input number of galaxies for both catalogues in comparison with the group/cluster mass, however, this does not guarantee that the correct member galaxies are being selected. We do not observe significantly higher scatter for either mock galaxy catalogues. Our results have implications for cosmological analyses that utilise the masses, richnesses, or abundances of clusters, which have different uncertainties when different methods are used.

show abstract

The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Dynamical Masses and Scaling Relations for a Sample of Massive Sunyaev-Zel'dovich Effect Selected Galaxy Clusters $^,$

Cited by 112 publications

References 129 publications

CoMaLit – IV. Evolution and self-similarity of scaling relations with the galaxy cluster mass

CoMaLit – IV. Evolution and self-similarity of scaling relations with the galaxy cluster mass

LoCuSS: weak-lensing mass calibration of galaxy clusters

Galaxy Cluster Mass Reconstruction Project – II. Quantifying scatter and bias using contrasting mock catalogues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About