The Three Hundred project: dissecting the Fundamental Plane of galaxy clusters up to <i>z</i> = 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We perform a systematic study of the recently discovered Fundamental Plane of galaxy clusters (CFP) using ∼250 simulated clusters from The Three Hundred project, focusing on the stability of the plane against different temperature definitions and its dependence on the dynamical relaxation state of clusters. The CFP is characterized by $T\propto M_\mathrm{s}^\alpha \, r_\mathrm{s}^\beta$, defined with the gas temperature (T) and the characteristic halo scale radius and mass (rs and Ms) assuming a Navarro–Frenk–White halo description. We explore two definitions of weighted temperatures, namely mass-weighted and spectroscopic-like temperatures, in three radial ranges. The Three Hundred project clusters at z = 0 lie on a thin plane whose parameters (α, β) and dispersion (0.015–0.030 dex) depend on the gas temperature definition. The CFP for mass-weighted temperatures is closer to the virial equilibrium expectation (α = 1, β = −1) with a smaller dispersion. For gas temperatures measured within $500\ h^{-1}$ kpc, the resulting CFP deviates the most from the virial expectation and shifts towards the similarity solution for a secondary infall model (α = 1.5, β = −2). Independently of the temperature definition, we find that clusters at z = 1 and relaxed clusters form a CFP similar to the virial expectation, unlike disturbed clusters exhibiting stronger evolution. Only systems formed over the last 4 Gyr present a CFP that is closer to the similarity solution. All these findings are compatible with the CFP obtained for a Cluster Lensing And Supernova survey with Hubble subsample excluding the hottest clusters with TX > 12 keV.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".