The effect of radiative cooling on the X-ray properties of galaxy clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the effect of cooling on the X-ray properties of galaxy clusters. We have performed N-body, hydrodynamical simulations both with and without the effects of radiative cooling, but neglecting the effects of star formation and feedback. We show that radiative cooling produces an inflow of high-entropy gas from the outer parts of the cluster, thus raising the cluster temperature and decreasing the X-ray luminosity. With radiative cooling clusters are on average from three to five times less luminous in X-rays than the same clusters simulated without cooling. However, we do not produce a large constant-density core in either the gas or the dark matter distributions. Our results contradict previous work in which cooling raises the X-ray luminosity and deposits an unreasonably large amount of mass in the central cluster galaxy. We achieve this by selecting our numerical resolution in such a way that a reasonable fraction of the baryonic material cools and by decoupling the hot and cold gas in our simulations, a first step towards modelling multiphase gas. We emphasize that globally cooling a sensible amount of material is vital and the presence or absence of massive central concentrations of cold baryonic material has a dramatic effect upon the resultant X-ray properties of the clusters.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".