MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993011209 · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/711/2/1033

LoCuSS: A COMPARISON OF CLUSTER MASS MEASUREMENTS FROM<i>XMM-NEWTON</i>AND SUBARU—TESTING DEVIATION FROM HYDROSTATIC EQUILIBRIUM AND NON-THERMAL PRESSURE SUPPORT

2010· article· en· W1993011209 on OpenAlexaff
Yu-Ying Zhang, N. Okabe, A. Finoguenov, G. P. Smith, Rocco Piffaretti, R. Valdarnini, Arif Babul, A. E. Evrard, P. Mazzotta, Alastair J. R. Sanderson, Daniel P. Marrone

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanMax-Planck-GesellschaftSpace Telescope Science InstituteBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore CountyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsHydrostatic equilibriumPhysicsCluster (spacecraft)RADIUSAstrophysicsAdiabatic processSubaru TelescopeThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compare X-ray hydrostatic and weak-lensing mass estimates for a sample of 12 clusters that have been observed with both XMM-Newton and Subaru. At an over-density of Δ=500, we obtain 1-M^{X}/M^{WL}=0.01+/-0.07 for the whole sample. We also divided the sample into undisturbed and disturbed sub-samples based on quantitative X-ray morphologies using asymmetry and fluctuation parameters, obtaining 1-M^{X}/M^{WL}=0.09+/-0.06 and -0.06+/-0.12 for the undisturbed and disturbed clusters, respectively. In addition to non-thermal pressure support, there may be a competing effect associated with adiabatic compression and/or shock heating which leads to overestimate of X-ray hydrostatic masses for disturbed clusters, for example, in the famous merging cluster A1914. Despite the modest statistical significance of the mass discrepancy, on average, in the undisturbed clusters, we detect a clear trend of improving agreement between M^{X} and M^{WL} as a function of increasing over-density, M^{X}/M^{WL}=(0.908+/-0.004)+(0.187+/-0.010) \log_{10}(Δ/500). We also examine the gas mass fractions, f_{gas}=M^{gas}/M^{WL}, finding that they are an increasing function of cluster radius, with no dependence on dynamical state, in agreement with predictions from numerical simulations. Overall, our results demonstrate that XMM-Newton and Subaru are a powerful combination for calibrating systematic uncertainties in cluster mass measurements.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations159
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsFrench-language works237,207