REVIEW 2 cited by
Mass modeling of galaxy clusters: quantifying hydrostatic bias and contribution from non-thermal pressure
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Galaxy cluster mass determinations achieved using X-ray and Sunyaev-Zel'dovich data combined with the assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium are generally biased. The bias exists for two main reasons: non-thermal pressure forces are expected to contribute to the overall pressure balance and deviations from spherical symmetry and hydrostatic equilibrium can be present. In this paper, we use a sample of zoom-in hydrodynamical simulations of galaxy clusters to measure the magnitude of hydrostatic bias and the non-thermal contribution to the total pressure. We propose a new empirical model for non-thermal pressure based on our simulations that can be applied to observations. We show that our model can be successfully applied to remove most of the bias related to neglection of non-thermal pressure, which is usually not included in hydrostatic cluster mass profile reconstructions. The use of this model may significantly improve the calibration of cluster scaling relations that are a key tool for cluster cosmology.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
SLICE: SPT-CL J0546-5345 -- A prominent strong-lensing cluster at $z=1.07$
SPT-CL J0546-5345 is a prominent strong-lensing galaxy cluster at z=1.07, with Einstein radii up to about 28 arcseconds and a projected mass of about 2e14 solar masses within 200 kpc, comparable to Hubble Frontier Fie...
-
Correcting the hydrostatic mass for non-thermal gas motions: a comparison of two approaches
The two correction approaches differ in their radial dependence in 3D but agree to within a few percent in projected observations, with the non-thermal pressure fraction underestimated by a factor of about 2.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.