Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

X-ray view of a massive node of the Cosmic Web at z=3 II. Discovery of extended X-ray emission around a hyperluminous QSO

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Around a z=3.25 quasar, Chandra sees a compact halo of hot gas — the earliest thermal proto-intracluster medium yet detected.

desk verdict A credible, carefully controlled first detection of extended thermal X-ray emission around a z>3 QSO, with virial-scale mass estimates that are clearly model-dependent extrapolations. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20074 v1 pith:CIPKMNLY submitted 2025-08-27 astro-ph.GA

Andrea Travascio , Sebastiano Cantalupo , Gabriele Pezzulli , Paolo Tozzi , Luca Di Mascolo , Michela Esposito , Titouan Lazeyras , Marika Lepore
show 12 more authors
Stefano Borgani Martin Elvis Giuseppina Fabbiano Marta Galbiati Nicholas Ledos Riccardo Middei Antonio Pensabene Enrico Piconcelli Giada Quadri Fabio Vito Weichen Wang Luca Zappacosta
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords proto-intraclustermediumcircumgalactichotgasX-rayemissionquasarprotoclusterLyαnebulacosmicweb
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports the first detection of extended X-ray emission around a quasar at redshift 3.25 that points to hot, virialized gas — the earliest thermal proto-intracluster medium (proto-ICM) suggested so far. Using 634 ks of Chandra data, the authors find about 66 net counts (≈8σ) in the 0.5–2 keV band extending to at least 30 kpc from the brightest quasar in the MQN01 protocluster, with isotropic morphology and a soft spectrum. They model it as collisional-ionization-equilibrium plasma at kT≈1.8 keV, infer a halo of about 3×10^13 solar masses whose hot gas holds roughly half the cosmic baryon budget, and argue that the hot phase's pressure is high enough to confine the cold clumps that produce the system's giant Lyα nebula. If correct, the result connects quasar Lyα nebulae at z>3 to the hot intracluster medium seen in nearby clusters and shows a multi-phase circumgalactic medium already in place only about two billion years after the Big Bang.

What carries the argument

Two components carry the argument. First, a classic β-model density profile — ne(r) = ne,0 [1 + (r/rcore)^2]^(−3β/2), the standard power-law-like profile used for cluster gas — is projected from three dimensions onto the sky through an Abel-transform identity, with an explicit proof of the required integral in Appendix C. This converts the spectral normalization measured in the 2″–3″ annulus into a central electron density ne,0, from which gas mass within Rvir, pressure, and cooling times are derived. Second, a joint MCMC fit of four concentric spectra simultaneously models the quasar's power-law PSF contribution and the thermal plasma component, using an exponential prior on β and a log-uni

What would settle it

Take the current ALMA Band 3 data and inject the MCMC posterior β-models: the predicted SZ significance is only (2.6±0.4)σ, so the planned deeper ALMA observations can settle the matter. If a resolved SZ decrement matching the X-ray-derived pressure profile does not appear at roughly 5σ confidence, the hot-gas mass and baryon fraction would have to shrink. A second check is spectral: the 15–30 kpc annulus should show a bremsstrahlung-like tail (CIE plasma at kT≈1.8 keV) rather than a steep power law with photon index Γ≈6, which would indicate inverse Compton radiation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the soft X-ray excess around QSO ID1 in MQN01 is thermal emission from hot plasma, not AGN photoionization, inverse Compton scattering, or Compton up-scattering by a wind. The evidence is a PSF-subtracted radial profile showing ≈66±8 net counts (≈8σ) in the 0.5–2 keV band out to ≈30 kpc, an isotropic residual map, and a spectrum whose excess lies below 2 keV. A joint spatial-spectral MCMC fit with a β-model density profile and an xsmekal CIE plasma gives kT≈1.8±0.4 keV, β≈2.0, rcore≈36 kpc, and a steep, compact gas distribution. Alongside the fit, the paper reports that the inferred virial mass is Mvir≈3×10^13 Msun, the hot gas mass within Rvir≈190 kpc is Mhot≈2.6×1

Load-bearing premise

The mass and baryon-fraction numbers assume the β-model fitted to the single 15–30 kpc annulus keeps holding all the way out to the 190 kpc virial radius; the data themselves say nothing about gas beyond 30 kpc.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The hot phase of the circumgalactic medium already exists at z≈3.25, so models of halo formation must produce a virialized, X-ray-emitting gas reservoir this early, not just at lower redshift.
  • Roughly half of the halo's cosmic baryon budget sits in the hot phase, meaning baryon censuses of high-redshift protoclusters cannot ignore hot gas even when it is detected only in the inner 30 kpc.
  • Hot-gas pressures of order 0.3–0.9 keV cm^-3 can confine the dense cold clumps needed to power giant Lyα nebulae, giving a physical explanation for why such nebulae survive around bright quasars in overdensities.
  • Short cooling-to-dynamical times (tcool/tff≈1.9 and tcool/tBV≈1.3 at 15 kpc) put the inner halo near the precipitation threshold, so localized condensation and cold inflow, rather than a global cooling flow, are plausible in this system.
  • MQN01 sits well above the local LX–TX relation even after self-similar redshift scaling, indicating that the thermodynamic state of this proto-ICM is not the same as evolved groups and clusters.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the extrapolated β-model is roughly right, similar compact hot halos around z>3 quasars in overdensities should be common at faint fluxes; a targeted survey of other MQN01-like fields could find them and test whether this is a universal phase or a rare event.
  • The steep β≈2 profile is atypical of local clusters; one natural reading is that we are seeing freshly shock-heated core gas before it has relaxed outward, but the paper does not establish that, and unresolved clumping could also steepen the apparent profile.
  • The pressure-confinement picture yields a testable prediction: Lyα surface-brightness fluctuations should anticorrelate with hot-gas pressure radius, and deeper X-ray imaging beyond 30 kpc should find a declining pressure that still bounds the clumps.
  • If future ALMA SZ data place the gas mass below the X-ray-derived value, the discrepancy would point to clumping or non-equilibrium conditions, and the reported baryon fraction would be an upper limit rather than a measurement.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes 634 ks of Chandra ACIS-I data on the MQN01 protocluster at z=3.25, concentrating on the brightest QSO (ID1). Using simulated PSFs, radial profiles, and PSF subtraction, the authors report ~66 net counts (≈8σ) of extended 0.5–2 keV emission between ~15 and 30 kpc, with upper limits beyond; the emission is isotropic and is not seen around other X-ray AGNs in the field. A joint spectral-spatial MCMC with a β-model plus a nuclear power law yields kT≈1.8 keV, β≈2.0, rcore≈36 kpc, and a thermal normalization, from which they infer ne,0≈0.9 cm^-3, Mvir≈3×10^13 M☉, Rvir≈190 kpc, Mhot(<Rvir)≈2.6×10^12 M☉, fhot≈56% of the cosmic baryon budget, and L≈2.25×10^45 erg/s within 30 kpc. The authors test photoionization, inverse Compton, and Compton up-scattering alternatives, compare with Spiderweb and DIANOGA simulations, and discuss cooling, hydrostatic equilibrium, and pressure confinement of the Lyα-emitting clumps.

Significance. If correct, this is a first detection of hot CGM/proto-ICM thermal emission at z>3 and a valuable multi-phase view of a massive forming halo. The detection methodology is a strength: deep Chandra data, PSF simulations, refined astrometric alignment, and the comparison with the bright AGN ID2 give credibility to the extended soft excess. The analytical projection formula in Appendix C is a useful contribution. However, the headline baryon-budget and gas-mass numbers are not directly measured: they rely on extrapolating a β-model from the 15–30 kpc detection to Rvir≈190 kpc, with a strongly degenerate β–rcore posterior. The paper is therefore scientifically important but needs a substantial reframing of the derived quantities.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.1–4.2, Eq. (9)] The direct detection constrains the surface brightness only in the 2″–4″ annulus (15–30 kpc); Figure 9 shows upper limits beyond 30 kpc, and the outer MCMC annulus (5″–8″) is described as below the background level. Equation (9) integrates the β-model to Rvir=190 kpc, while Figure 6 shows a strong β–rcore degeneracy. The median β=2.04, rcore=36 kpc is one of several allowed profiles; β≈1.3, rcore≈50 kpc is also within the posterior and changes Mhot by factors of several. The abstract's fhot≈56% should be presented as a model-dependent extrapolation, not a measurement, and should be accompanied by an exploration of profile families and clumping.
  2. [§4.2, §5.7] Mvir is derived from kT via the Dekel & Birnboim (2006) virial scaling, and the hydrostatic check in §5.7 gives pressure-gradient/gravity ratios of 0.7–1.3 with broad uncertainties. Because Rvir and Mvir enter Mhot and fhot, the virial assumption is load-bearing. Please propagate an alternative mass calibration (e.g., from the SZ non-detection or from the Lyα velocity field) or add an explicit systematic term; at minimum the text should state that Mvir is not independently confirmed.
  3. [Abstract, §6, Table 2] The abstract reports a measured L2-10≈2.3×10^45 erg/s within the central 30 kpc, while §6 and Figure 11 use L0.5-2 and quote ≈2.25×10^45 erg/s. Summing the thermal L2-10 entries in Table 2 across the central apertures gives approximately 1.1×10^45 erg/s, not 2.3×10^45. This band confusion directly affects the LX–TX outlier claim and must be corrected and clarified.
  4. [§4.3, §5.2] The thermal interpretation rests on a soft excess of only ~66 net counts and a power-law alternative with Γ≈6. The fit degeneracies (kT–norm, β–rcore) and unconstrained metallicity are acknowledged, but the luminosity in the inner 2″ region includes an extrapolated thermal fraction (~12%) that depends on the β-model. The quoted Lx values should be reported as 'assuming the fiducial β-model' throughout. The conservative >1 keV spectral fit tests the temperature prior but does not address the spatial-profile extrapolation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (8)] The 'vt' before the square-root factor appears to be a rendering artifact; please replace with the intended mathematical notation.
  2. [§3.1] Typo: 'signficant' should read 'significant'. Please also check the escaped spacing in words such as 'a ffects' and 'e ffective' in the discussion sections.
  3. [Eq. (4)] The notation normrin,rout is introduced without a precise statement that it is the xsmekal normalization for the projected annulus; this should be stated explicitly to avoid confusion with the 3D density normalization.
  4. [Abstract and text] The object is variously called 'MQN01 Cosmic Node', 'MQN01 Cosmic Structure', and 'MQN01 protocluster'. Please unify the terminology.
  5. [Figure 10] The caption says the shaded region is the 68% confidence interval from Monte Carlo realizations; specify how those realizations sample the MCMC posterior and whether the β-model is fixed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the extended-emission detection and thermal interpretation are data-driven; derived halo properties are model-dependent extrapolations, not circular predictions.

full rationale

The central detection rests on PSF-subtracted radial profiles and a spectral excess (Sects. 3.1 and 3.3), independent of the thermal model. The joint MCMC (Sect. 4.1) fits kT, norm, beta, and rcore simultaneously; the derived Mvir, ne,0, Mhot, and fhot are deterministic transforms of these fitted parameters under explicitly stated assumptions (beta-model, spherical symmetry, virial scaling, fb = 0.15). No target quantity is fed back into the fit, and the model is not calibrated to reproduce Mhot or fhot. The steep beta is not an artifact of the prior: the exponential prior favors beta <~ 1, yet the posterior peaks at beta ~ 2. The beta-rcore degeneracy and the 15-30 kpc to Rvir extrapolation are acknowledged (Sect. 4.1, Fig. 6) and are robustness concerns, not circular reasoning. Self-citations (Travascio et al. 2024 for the source catalog; Pezzulli & Cantalupo 2019 and Cantalupo et al. 2019 for interpretation) provide context and are not used to justify the X-ray detection or to exclude alternatives; even the Abel-transform identity is proved in Appendix C rather than imported from a self-citation. Alternative emission mechanisms (photoionization, inverse Compton, Compton up-scattering) are modeled and disfavored on independent grounds. The SZ non-detection is compared with, not used to set, the model parameters. No uniqueness theorem is invoked. The paper's explicit caveats (Sects. 4.3 and 5.7) show that the derived baryon budget is model-dependent, but not that it is equivalent to its inputs by construction. The result is a legitimate model-based inference from new data, not a circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results (Mvir, Mhot, fhot, Lx) are derived from the fitted MCMC parameters and the beta-model extrapolation. The free parameters are all fitted to the same 634 ks dataset. The axioms are standard modeling assumptions in X-ray cluster astronomy, but the extrapolation from the detected annulus to Rvir is the main unverified step.

free parameters (7)
  • kT = 1.8 ± 0.4 keV
    Plasma temperature fitted in MCMC; governs luminosity and virial mass.
  • norm2,3 = 2.13(+1.75,-0.82) x 10^-4 cm^-5
    Thermal normalization in the 2''-3'' annulus; sets gas density and mass.
  • Z = 0.014(+0.083,-0.012) Zsun
    Metallicity fitted for marginalization; poorly constrained.
  • beta = 2.04(+1.35,-0.75)
    Beta-model slope; steep profile drives high central density and extrapolated mass.
  • rcore = 36(+16,-13) kpc
    Core radius of beta model; degenerate with beta.
  • normpow = 2.07(+0.15,-0.18) x 10^-5
    Power-law normalization of the AGN; needed to separate nuclear spillover.
  • Gamma = 2.09 ± 0.07
    Photon index of the AGN power law.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Chandra PSF model accurately represents the instrument response at ID1; PSF normalization matches counts in the central 2''.
    Section 3.1: extended emission is measured by subtracting the simulated PSF; any PSF error biases the residual.
  • domain assumption The soft excess is optically thin, collisionally ionized equilibrium plasma (xsmekal).
    Section 4.1: thermal model is assumed; alternatives are tested but the CIE spectrum is the baseline.
  • domain assumption The gas density follows a spherically symmetric beta model with constant temperature and metallicity.
    Equations (2) and (5): the density profile is constrained only at 15-30 kpc and extrapolated to Rvir.
  • domain assumption The halo is virialized; Mvir is derived from kT via the Dekel & Birnboim (2006) scaling relation.
    Section 4.2: the virial mass, Rvir, and baryon fraction all flow from this.
  • domain assumption Cosmic baryon fraction fb = Ωb/Ωm = 0.15.
    Section 4.2: used to convert Mhot/Mvir to fhot.
  • domain assumption The background is described by a power law plus five Gaussian lines from an off-source region.
    Section 4.1: affects low-count spectra.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of X-ray view of a massive node of the Cosmic Web at z=3 II. Discovery of extended X-ray emission around a hyperluminous QSO." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CIPKMNLY

@misc{pith2026250820074,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: X-ray view of a massive node of the Cosmic Web at z=3 II. Discovery of extended X-ray emission around a hyperluminous QSO},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CIPKMNLY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20074}
}
read the original abstract

While the warm, ionized gas in the CGM at z>3 is now routinely observed around bright QSOs in Lya emission, little is known about the CGM hot phase due to its expected faintness in the X-ray band, often referred to as the ICM. Here, we report the analysis of 634 ks of Chandra X-ray observations in the MQN01 Cosmic Node, a region containing one of the brightest Lya nebulae and the largest galaxy overdensity discovered so far at z>3. We detect 66 net counts of X-ray emission in the 0.5-2 keV band extending to at least 30 kpc from the brightest QSO in MQN01. The morphology and spectrum are consistent with thermal emission from hot plasma in CIE. Photoionization is negligible, and IC is disfavored. A joint spatial and spectral MCMC analysis provides consistency with a beta-model with a steep density profile and a gas temperature kT~1.8 keV and virial halo mass Mvir~3e13 Mo. The inferred hot gas mass is Mhot(<Rvir)~2.6e12 Mo, which is ~8.3% of Mvir, or ~56% of the theoretical cosmological baryon budget of the halo. The hot gas also emits an exceptionally high Lx, with a measured L2-10~2.3e45 erg/s within the central 30 kpc. This system is a clear outlier in the Lx-Tx plane, indicating a thermodynamic state distinct from that of evolved lower-redshift hot halos. The cooling time in the inner 15-30 kpc is comparable to the local dynamical time, suggesting that the gas could become locally unstable in the absence of heating or feedback. Moreover, the thermal pressure associated with the detected CGM hot phase is large enough to confine the cold and dense clumps, which are required to reproduce the high Lya emission associated with the inner regions of the MQN01 structure. Although limited to a single system, our results provide unique information on the multi-phase properties of the CGM and a view of the nascent thermal hot gas phase observed in local galaxy clusters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.20074 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Evidence for residual soft X-ray emission at < 2 keV around the brightest QSO in the MQN01 field, ID1, assuming all emission within the central 2′′ is due to the AGN. This results in a conservative estimate of the extended component, which is likely non-zero even within this region. Radial profiles of surface counts centered on the QSO ID1, derived from the data (black dots) and the simulated PSF+background (red dot… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Data (left), simulated PSF (middle), and PSF-subtracted (right) images at the 0.5-2 keV energy band. Red dashed circles indicate the radial bins used for profile extraction, corresponding to the following radii: ∼2 ′′, 2.5′′, 3′′, 4′′, 5.5′′, 8.9′′, 10.3′′, and 11.3′′. The QSO position is marked with a black dot, and the black shaded circle represents the 2′′ radius used to normalize PSF counts to the data. The annu… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Smoothed soft X-ray 0.5-2.0 keV count map of the extended X-ray emission, obtained after subtracting the QSO’s PSF contribution. The filled black dot marks the QSO center with a radius of 1′′, while the transparent dot represents the inner 2′′ region, where counts are used to rescale the PSF to the image. The magenta contours trace the Lyα nebula at surface brightness (SB) levels of 2.5, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 × 10−18e… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the azimuthal flux distribution of the extended Lyα and X-ray emission. (a) PSF-subtracted map of the 0.5-2 keV Chandra X-ray image after subtracting the QSO’s PSF. Red contours show the Lyα SB levels as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spectral evidence for excess extended X-ray emission in the soft band, relative to the expected contribution from nuclear (PSF) emis￾sion in the 2′′-4′′ annulus. Top panel: Energy-dependent rescaling fac￾tors derived from simulated PSFs, used to estimate the nuclear sp…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Posterior probability distributions for the simultaneous MCMC modelling of the nuclear and extended emission. Contours represent the 68%, 95%, and 99.7% confidence levels. The solid red vertical lines and the red points mark the best-fit values, which we define as the …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Observed spectra extracted from four regions: the central 2′′ aperture (top left), and the 2′′-3′′, 3′′-5′′, and 5′′-8′′ annuli (top right, bottom left, and bottom right, respectively). Overplotted are the best-fit models (red lines) based on the median posterior value…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Impact of QSO photoionization on the thermal emission in the observed 0.5-2 keV energy band (highlighted by the shaded gray re￾gion). Panel (a) shows the SED adopted to represent the QSO radiation field, constrained by two photometric measurements (UV and X-ray; red an…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Electron density profiles, ne(r), of the hot halos in MQN01 (red), Spiderweb (blue), and DIANOGA simulations (gray). The red curve shows the best-fit model for MQN01, with the shaded region indicating the 68% confidence interval. The ne(r) profile of the Spiderweb hal…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Soft X-ray (0.5-2 keV) luminosity versus temperature kT of the ICM in massive structures across redshift. Symbols show galaxy clusters from Bulbul et al. (2019) (orange triangles), O’Hara et al. (2007) (magenta crosses), Mittal et al. (2011) (green squares), and high￾…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. The youth of the intracluster medium. I. A non-parametric characterisation of the gas and electron number density profiles of $z \simeq 2$ protoclusters

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    At z≈2, Magneticum protoclusters show moderate self-similarity deviations, double-β density profiles, and hot ionised gas dominant only beyond ~0.1–0.5 R500c, with clear mass, merger and AGN trends.

  2. An Inverse-Compton-Boosted Cool Core Unifies Perseus's Radio and X-ray Halos

    astro-ph.HE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Ancient cosmic ray halos from the central galaxy boost Perseus's cool core via inverse-Compton scattering, simultaneously explaining radio minihalo, giant halo, X-ray properties, and gamma-ray data without re-acceleration.

  3. The galaxy-halo connection and the dynamical evolution of a giant disc in a massive node of the Cosmic Web at z~3

    astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    The Big Wheel at z~3 has a stellar-to-halo mass ratio of 0.06, higher than expected, implying efficient stellar assembly without major mergers or instabilities.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

106 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

  3. [3]

    & Huertas-Company , M

    Andreon , S. & Huertas-Company , M. 2011, A&A, 526, A11

    2011

  4. [4]

    Arnaud , K. A. 1996, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems V, ed. G. H. Jacoby & J. Barnes , 17

    1996

  5. [5]

    J., & Scott , P

    Asplund , M., Grevesse , N., Sauval , A. J., & Scott , P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481

    2009

  6. [6]

    d., et al

    Barret , D., Albouys , V., Herder , J.-W. d., et al. 2023, ExA, 55, 373

    2023

  7. [7]

    2009, MNRAS, 397, 1804

    Binney , J., Nipoti , C., & Fraternali , F. 2009, MNRAS, 397, 1804

    2009

  8. [8]

    J., et al

    Borisova , E., Cantalupo , S., Lilly , S. J., et al. 2016, , 831, 39

    2016

Show all 106 references
  1. [9]

    N., Mohr , J

    Bulbul , E., Chiu , I. N., Mohr , J. J., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 50

    2019

  2. [10]

    2010, MNRAS, 403, L16

    Cantalupo , S. 2010, MNRAS, 403, L16

    2010

  3. [11]

    J., et al

    Cantalupo , S., Pezzulli , G., Lilly , S. J., et al. 2019, , 483, 5188

    2019

  4. [12]

    & Fusco-Femiano , R

    Cavaliere , A. & Fusco-Femiano , R. 1976, , 49, 137

    1976

  5. [13]

    Choudhury , P. P. & Sharma , P. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 2554

    2016

  6. [14]

    2011, A&A, 532, A14

    Conte , A., de Petris , M., Comis , B., Lamagna , L., & de Gregori , S. 2011, A&A, 532, A14

    2011

  7. [15]

    A., Wyithe , J

    Correa , C. A., Wyithe , J. S. B., Schaye , J., & Duffy , A. R. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 1217

    2015

  8. [16]

    C., Gallo , L., & Ross , R

    Crummy , J., Fabian , A. C., Gallo , L., & Ross , R. R. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 1067

    2006

  9. [17]

    2024, arXiv, arXiv:2403.12600

    Damiano , A., Valentini , M., Borgani , S., et al. 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2403.12600

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    2023, MNRAS, 526, 1850

    de Beer , S., Cantalupo , S., Travascio , A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 1850

    2023

  11. [19]

    & Birnboim , Y

    Dekel , A. & Birnboim , Y. 2006, MNRAS, 368, 2

    2006

  12. [20]

    2023, , 615, 809

    Di Mascolo , L., Saro , A., Mroczkowski , T., et al. 2023, , 615, 809

    2023

  13. [21]

    2005, MNRAS, 364, 753

    Dolag , K., Vazza , F., Brunetti , G., & Tormen , G. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 753

    2005

  14. [22]

    & Voit , G

    Donahue , M. & Voit , G. M. 2022, PhR, 973, 1

    2022

  15. [23]

    W., Jin , C., Blaes , O., & Ward , M

    Done , C., Davis , S. W., Jin , C., Blaes , O., & Ward , M. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 1848

    2012

  16. [24]

    Dong , R., Rasmussen , J., & Mulchaey , J. S. 2010, ApJ, 712, 883

    2010

  17. [25]

    2013, A&A, 551, A22

    Eckert , D., Molendi , S., Vazza , F., Ettori , S., & Paltani , S. 2013, A&A, 551, A22

    2013

  18. [26]

    2015, MNRAS, 447, 2198

    Eckert , D., Roncarelli , M., Ettori , S., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 2198

    2015

  19. [27]

    C., Stewart , G

    Edge , A. C., Stewart , G. C., & Fabian , A. C. 1992, MNRAS, 258, 177

    1992

  20. [28]

    & Ulmer , M

    Ehlert , S. & Ulmer , M. P. 2009, , 503, 35

    2009

  21. [29]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.01674

    Esposito , M., Borgani , S., Strazzullo , V., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.01674

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    2013, SSRv, 177, 119

    Ettori , S., Donnarumma , A., Pointecouteau , E., et al. 2013, SSRv, 177, 119

    2013

  23. [31]

    2009, A&A, 501, 61

    Ettori , S., Morandi , A., Tozzi , P., et al. 2009, A&A, 501, 61

    2009

  24. [32]

    Fabian , A. C. 1994, ARA&A, 32, 277

    1994

  25. [33]

    C., Crawford , C

    Fabian , A. C., Crawford , C. S., Ettori , S., & Sanders , J. S. 2001, MNRAS, 322, L11

    2001

  26. [34]

    & Quataert , E

    Faucher-Gigu \`e re , C.-A. & Quataert , E. 2012, , 425, 605

    2012

  27. [35]

    J., Korista , K

    Ferland , G. J., Korista , K. T., Verner , D. A., et al. 1998, , 110, 761

    1998

  28. [36]

    W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J

    Foreman-Mackey , D., Hogg , D. W., Lang , D., & Goodman , J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306

    2013

  29. [37]

    2001, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Freeman , P., Doe , S., & Siemiginowska , A. 2001, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 4477, Astronomical Data Analysis, ed. J.-L. Starck & F. D. Murtagh , 76--87

    2001

  30. [38]

    2024, arXiv, arXiv:2410.03822

    Galbiati , M., Cantalupo , S., Steidel , C., et al. 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2410.03822

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Gaspari , M., Ruszkowski , M., & Oh , S. P. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 3401

    2013

  32. [40]

    D., Burchett , J

    Ge , C., Wang , Q. D., Burchett , J. N., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 481, 4111

    2018

  33. [41]

    2007, , 463, 79

    Gilli , R., Comastri , A., & Hasinger , G. 2007, , 463, 79

    2007

  34. [42]

    Gnedin , N. Y. & Hollon , N. 2012, ApJS, 202, 13

    2012

  35. [43]

    H., Zaritsky , D., & Zabludoff , A

    Gonzalez , A. H., Zaritsky , D., & Zabludoff , A. I. 2007, ApJ, 666, 147

    2007

  36. [44]

    Gradshteyn, I. S. & Ryzhik, I. M. 2007, Table of integrals, series, and products, seventh edn. (Elsevier/Academic Press, Amsterdam), xlviii+1171, translated from the Russian, Translation edited and with a preface by Alan Jeffrey and Daniel Zwillinger, With one CD-ROM (Windows,...

    2007

  37. [45]

    P., Valentini , M., & Dolag , K

    Groth , F., Steinwandel , U. P., Valentini , M., & Dolag , K. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 616

    2023

  38. [46]

    2013, ApJS, 208, 19

    Hinshaw , G., Larson , D., Komatsu , E., et al. 2013, ApJS, 208, 19

    2013

  39. [47]

    S., Mittal , R., Reiprich , T

    Hudson , D. S., Mittal , R., Reiprich , T. H., et al. 2010, A&A, 513, A37

    2010

  40. [48]

    & Forman , W

    Jones , C. & Forman , W. 1984, ApJ, 276, 38

    1984

  41. [49]

    1986, MNRAS, 222, 323

    Kaiser , N. 1986, MNRAS, 222, 323

    1986

  42. [50]

    2022, , 938, 123

    Kooistra , R., Lee , K.-G., & Horowitz , B. 2022, , 938, 123

    2022

  43. [51]

    Kravtsov , A. V. & Borgani , S. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 353

    2012

  44. [52]

    2024, , 682, A186

    Lepore , M., Di Mascolo , L., Tozzi , P., et al. 2024, , 682, A186

    2024

  45. [53]

    A., Osterheld , A

    Liedahl , D. A., Osterheld , A. L., & Goldstein , W. H. 1995, , 438, L115

    1995

  46. [54]

    2024, A&A, 688, A76

    Mastromarino , C., Oppizzi , F., De Luca , F., Bourdin , H., & Mazzotta , P. 2024, A&A, 688, A76

    2024

  47. [55]

    & Williams , R

    Mathur , S. & Williams , R. J. 2003, ApJL, 589, L1

    2003

  48. [56]

    J., et al

    Mauch , T., Murphy , T., Buttery , H. J., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 342, 1117

    2003

  49. [57]

    J., Giles , P

    Maughan , B. J., Giles , P. A., Randall , S. W., Jones , C., & Forman , W. R. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 1583

    2012

  50. [58]

    McCourt , M., Sharma , P., Quataert , E., & Parrish , I. J. 2012, MNRAS, 419, 3319

    2012

  51. [59]

    R., & Tremblay , G

    McDonald , M., Gaspari , M., McNamara , B. R., & Tremblay , G. R. 2018, ApJ, 858, 45

    2018

  52. [60]

    Mewe , R., Gronenschild , E. H. B. M., & van den Oord , G. H. J. 1985, , 62, 197

    1985

  53. [61]

    R., & van den Oord , G

    Mewe , R., Lemen , J. R., & van den Oord , G. H. J. 1986, , 65, 511

    1986

  54. [62]

    Mirakhor , M. S. & Walker , S. A. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 139

    2021

  55. [63]

    S., Walker , S

    Mirakhor , M. S., Walker , S. A., & Runge , J. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 1109

    2022

  56. [64]

    H., & Jaritz , V

    Mittal , R., Hicks , A., Reiprich , T. H., & Jaritz , V. 2011, A&A, 532, A133

    2011

  57. [65]

    J., Mathiesen , B., & Evrard , A

    Mohr , J. J., Mathiesen , B., & Evrard , A. E. 1999, ApJ, 517, 627

    1999

  58. [66]

    2015, MNRAS, 450, 2261

    Morandi , A., Sun , M., Forman , W., & Jones , C. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 2261

    2015

  59. [67]

    & Lau , E

    Nagai , D. & Lau , E. T. 2011, ApJL, 731, L10

    2011

  60. [68]

    F., Frenk , C

    Navarro , J. F., Frenk , C. S., & White , S. D. M. 1996, ApJ, 462, 563

    1996

  61. [69]

    & Posti , L

    Nipoti , C. & Posti , L. 2014, ApJ, 792, 21

    2014

  62. [70]

    B., Mohr , J

    O'Hara , T. B., Mohr , J. J., & Sanderson , A. J. R. 2007, arXiv, arXiv:0710.5782

    2007 arXiv

  63. [71]

    A., et al

    Paggi , A., Massaro , F., Pe \ n a-Herazo , H. A., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A79

    2021

  64. [72]

    Peebles , P. J. E. 1980, The large-scale structure of the universe

    1980

  65. [73]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.04765

    Pensabene , A., Cantalupo , S., Cicone , C., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2401.04765

    2024 arXiv

  66. [74]

    & Cantalupo , S

    Pezzulli , G. & Cantalupo , S. 2019, , 486, 1489

    2019

  67. [75]

    2017, MNRAS, 467, 311

    Pezzulli , G., Fraternali , F., & Binney , J. 2017, MNRAS, 467, 311

    2017

  68. [76]

    C., Husemann , B., Tremblay , G

    Powell , M. C., Husemann , B., Tremblay , G. R., et al. 2018, A&A, 618, A27

    2018

  69. [77]

    W., Arnaud , M., Maughan , B

    Pratt , G. W., Arnaud , M., Maughan , B. J., & Melin , J. B. 2023, A&A, 669, C2

    2023

  70. [78]

    S., Kara , E

    Reynolds , C. S., Kara , E. A., Mushotzky , R. F., et al. 2023, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 12678, UV, X-Ray, and Gamma-Ray Space Instrumentation for Astronomy XXIII, ed. O. H. Siegmund & K. Hoadley , 126781E

    2023

  71. [79]

    2002, , 566, 667

    Rosati , P., Tozzi , P., Giacconi , R., et al. 2002, , 566, 667

    2002

  72. [80]

    E., et al

    Ruppin , F., McDonald , M., Bleem , L. E., et al. 2021, ApJ, 918, 43

    2021

  73. [81]

    2009, MNRAS, 392, 795

    Saro , A., Borgani , S., Tornatore , L., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 795

    2009

  74. [82]

    2000, ApJL, 537, L73

    Sato , S., Akimoto , F., Furuzawa , A., et al. 2000, ApJL, 537, L73

    2000

  75. [83]

    Shimakawa , R., Koyama , Y., R \"o ttgering , H. J. A., et al. 2018, , 481, 5630

    2018

  76. [84]

    M., et al

    Siemiginowska , A., Burke , D., G \"u nther , H. M., et al. 2024, , 274, 43

    2024

  77. [85]

    M., Lehmer , B

    Smail , I., Blundell , K. M., Lehmer , B. D., & Alexander , D. M. 2012, ApJ, 760, 132

    2012

  78. [86]

    A., Holden , B., Rosati , P., et al

    Stanford , S. A., Holden , B., Rosati , P., et al. 2001, ApJ, 552, 504

    2001

  79. [87]

    2021, ApJ, 911, 88

    Stern , J., Faucher-Gigu \`e re , C.-A., Fielding , D., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 88

    2021

  80. [88]

    Sunyaev , R. A. & Zeldovich , Y. B. 1972, CoASP, 4, 173

    1972

  81. [89]

    2022, A&A, 667, A134

    Tozzi , P., Gilli , R., Liu , A., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A134

    2022

  82. [90]

    S., Jee , M

    Tozzi , P., Santos , J. S., Jee , M. J., et al. 2015, , 799, 93

    2015

  83. [91]

    2024, arXiv, arXiv:2410.03933

    Travascio , A., Cantalupo , S., Tozzi , P., et al. 2024, arXiv, arXiv:2410.03933

    2024 arXiv

  84. [92]

    S., et al

    van Marrewijk , J., Di Mascolo , L., Gill , A. S., et al. 2024, , 689, A41

    2024

  85. [93]

    2025, A&A, 695, A204

    van Marrewijk , J., Kaasinen , M., Popping , G., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A204

    2025

  86. [94]

    2013, MNRAS, 429, 799

    Vazza , F., Eckert , D., Simionescu , A., Br \"u ggen , M., & Ettori , S. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 799

    2013

  87. [95]

    S., et al

    Vikhlinin , A., Markevitch , M., Murray , S. S., et al. 2005, ApJ, 628, 655

    2005

  88. [96]

    M., Donahue , M., Bryan , G

    Voit , G. M., Donahue , M., Bryan , G. L., & McDonald , M. 2015, Natur, 519, 203

    2015

  89. [97]

    M., Meece , G., Li , Y., et al

    Voit , G. M., Meece , G., Li , Y., et al. 2017, ApJ, 845, 80

    2017

  90. [98]

    & Abel , T

    Wang , P. & Abel , T. 2008, , 672, 752

    2008

  91. [99]

    2016, , 828, 56

    Wang , T., Elbaz , D., Daddi , E., et al. 2016, , 828, 56

    2016

  92. [100]

    2017, MNRAS, 465, 3291

    Weinberger , R., Springel , V., Hernquist , L., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3291

    2017

  93. [101]

    D., Voit , G

    Wibking , B. D., Voit , G. M., & O'Shea , B. W. 2025, MNRAS, 537, 739

    2025

  94. [102]

    W., McNamara , B

    Wise , M. W., McNamara , B. R., & Murray , S. S. 2004, ApJ, 601, 184

    2004

  95. [103]

    M., Birkinshaw , M., & Young , A

    Worrall , D. M., Birkinshaw , M., & Young , A. J. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 174

    2016

  96. [104]

    & Wu , X.-P

    Xue , Y.-J. & Wu , X.-P. 2000, MNRAS, 318, 715

    2000

  97. [105]

    C., Celotti, A., & Jonker, P

    Yuan, W., Fabian, A. C., Celotti, A., & Jonker, P. G. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 346, L7–L10

    2003

  98. [106]

    & King , A

    Zubovas , K. & King , A. 2012, , 745, L34

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.