MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2823209005 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf230

X-Ray Properties of SPT-selected Galaxy Clusters at 0.2 < z < 1.5 Observed with XMM-Newton

2019· article· en· W2823209005 on OpenAlexaff
Esra Bülbül, I. Chiu, J. J. Mohr, M. McDonald, B. A. Benson, Mark W. Bautz, Matthew Bayliss, L. E. Bleem, M. Brodwin, S. Bocquet, R. Capasso, J. P. Dietrich, Julie Hlavacek-Larrondo, W. L. Holzapfel, Gourav Khullar, Matthias Klein, Ralph Kraft, Eric D. Miller, C. L. Reichardt, Keren Sharon, B. Stalder, T. Schrabback, Adam Stanford

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAstrophysicsRedshiftHaloGalaxy clusterObservableSouth Pole TelescopeScalingLuminosityHalo mass functionGalaxyCluster (spacecraft)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present measurements of the X-ray observables of the intracluster medium (ICM), including luminosity L X , ICM mass M ICM , emission-weighted mean temperature T X , and integrated pressure Y X , that are derived from XMM-Newton X-ray observations of a Sunyaev–Zel’dovich effect (SZE) selected sample of 59 galaxy clusters from the South Pole Telescope SPT-SZ survey that span the redshift range 0.20 < z < 1.5. We constrain the best-fit power-law scaling relations between X-ray observables, redshift, and halo mass. The halo masses are estimated based on previously published SZE observable-to-mass scaling relations, calibrated using information that includes the halo mass function. Employing SZE-based masses in this sample enables us to constrain these scaling relations for massive galaxy clusters ( M 500 ≥ 3 × 10 14 M ⊙ ) to the highest redshifts where these clusters exist without concern for X-ray selection biases. We find that the mass trends are steeper than self-similarity in all cases, and with ≥2.5 σ significance in the case of L X and M ICM . The redshift trends are consistent with the self-similar expectation, but the uncertainties remain large. Core-included scaling relations tend to have steeper mass trends for L X . There is no convincing evidence for a redshift-dependent mass trend in any observable. The constraints on the amplitudes of the fitted scaling relations are currently limited by the systematic uncertainties on the SZE-based halo masses, but the redshift and mass trends are limited by the X-ray sample size and the measurement uncertainties of the X-ray observables.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations126
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207