MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2128270775 · doi:10.1086/591307

Fundamental Plane of Sunyaev‐Zel’dovich Clusters

2008· article· en· W2128270775 on OpenAlexaff
Niayesh Afshordi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsIntracluster mediumGalaxy clusterCluster (spacecraft)Fundamental plane (elliptical galaxies)RedshiftAstrophysicsVirial theoremStatistical physicsGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (SZ) cluster surveys are considered among the most promising methods for probing dark energy up to large redshifts. However, their premise is hinged on an accurate mass-observable relationship, which could be affected by the (rather poorly understood) physics of the intracluster gas. In this paper, using a semianalytic model of the intracluster gas that accommodates various theoretical uncertainties, I develop a fundamental plane relationship between the observed size, thermal energy, and mass of galaxy clusters. In particular, I find that M ∝ ( Y SZ / R SZ ,2 ) 3/4 , where M is the mass, Y SZ is the total SZ flux or thermal energy, and R SZ ,2 is the SZ half-light radius of the cluster. I first show that, within this model, using the fundamental plane relationship reduces the (systematic+random) errors in mass estimates to 14%, from 22% for a simple mass-flux relationship. Since measurement of the cluster sizes is an inevitable part of observing the SZ clusters, the fundamental plane relationship can be used to reduce the error of the cluster mass estimates by ~34%, improving the accuracy of the resulting cosmological constraints without any extra cost. I then argue why our fundamental plane is distinctly different from the virial relationship that one may naively expect between the cluster parameters. Finally, I argue that while including more details of the observed SZ profile cannot significantly improve the accuracy of mass estimates, a better understanding of the impact of nongravitational heating/cooling processes on the outskirts of the intracluster medium (apart from external calibrations) might be the best way to reduce these errors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal→Same topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena→French-language works237,207→