pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.28099 · v1 · pith:O6HD7U6Onew · submitted 2026-06-26 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.GA· astro-ph.IM

Thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich cross-correlations with unWISE galaxies: disentangling radio contamination, dust properties, and electron pressure

Guandi Zhao , Alex Krolewski , Niayesh Afshordi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 02:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.GAastro-ph.IM
keywords thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovichgalaxy cross-correlationsradio contaminationcosmic infrared backgroundunWISE galaxieselectron pressure profilehalo model
0
0 comments X

The pith

Including radio emission in the model for tSZ cross-correlations with unWISE galaxies is required and produces a positive signal to high multipoles consistent with halo models.

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

The paper analyzes the cross-correlation of thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich maps from Planck and ACT with two unWISE galaxy samples at low and intermediate redshift. It performs a simultaneous fit in harmonic space for the tSZ signal, cosmic infrared background amplitude, and radio emission using nine Planck frequency bands for model selection. A three-component model is preferred over a no-radio model at 9.5 sigma for the low-redshift sample and 11 sigma for the mid-redshift sample. Applying the fitted spectral parameters to clean the ACT maps removes an apparent negative cross-correlation, leaving a positive tSZ signal to multipole 6000 that matches a standard halo model plus a two-parameter generalized NFW electron pressure profile. This establishes a practical method to separate foregrounds and probe hot gas in galaxy halos on small angular scales.

Core claim

Fitting the galaxy-tSZ cross-power spectra directly in harmonic space with a model containing tSZ, radio emission, and a CIB amplitude term, the three-component model is strongly preferred; the derived effective CIB emissivity indices, dust temperatures, and radio spectral indices allow subtraction from the ACT 90/150/220 GHz maps, after which the cleaned spectra remain positive to ℓ ≃ 6000 and are well described by a conventional halo model calibrated to the galaxy population together with a two-parameter generalized NFW electron pressure profile.

What carries the argument

Three-component harmonic-space fit (tSZ + radio + CIB amplitude) using nine Planck bands to fix effective spectral parameters for foreground subtraction from ACT maps.

If this is right

  • The tSZ-galaxy cross-correlation can be measured positively on small scales once radio contamination is included.
  • The remaining signal after cleaning is consistent with a halo model using a two-parameter generalized NFW electron pressure profile.
  • Planck-derived foreground parameters can be transferred to ACT data to obtain consistent multi-frequency measurements.
  • Low-redshift unWISE samples can be used to probe hot gas in low-mass halos without the bias from omitted radio emission.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same cleaning approach could be tested on other galaxy catalogs to check whether the recovered pressure profile parameters remain stable.
  • If the radio spectral index shows redshift dependence beyond the two samples studied, multi-redshift analyses would require additional free parameters.
  • The positive high-multipole signal opens the possibility of using these cross-correlations to constrain the scale at which AGN feedback begins to suppress gas pressure.

Load-bearing premise

The effective spectral parameters for CIB and radio fitted from Planck nine-band data accurately describe the foregrounds in the ACT 90, 150, and 220 GHz maps without residual bias on the tSZ component.

What would settle it

A radio-cleaned tSZ cross-spectrum that turns negative at high multipoles or deviates significantly from the halo-model plus generalized NFW prediction would falsify the result.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.28099 by Alex Krolewski, Guandi Zhao, Niayesh Afshordi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: — Signal responses of the four components considered in this work. Responses that are negative are plotted with dashed curves. For the radio sources, the two scenarios βr = βff (free-free) and βr = βsyn (synchrotron) are both shown. The SED parameters for the CIB-amplitude and CIB-δβ response is taken as β0 = 1.7, T0 = 10.7 K, consistent with the fiducial values by Coulton et al. (2024). The responses are … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: — ACT+Planck source-subtracted coadded maps from ACT DR6, described in (Naess et al. 2025), and used in this work. The maps are shown in Galactic coordinates after applying the ACT footprint mask. 3.2. The Planck temperature map While ACT DR6 provides high angular resolution, it includes only three nominal frequency bands. To supplement the frequency information used for SED modeling, we also use the Planc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: — The beams used in this work for Planck and ACT frequency maps. The Planck beams are Gaussian with FWHM given in Sec. 3.2. The curves P-Frequency denote the Planck beams for nominal bands, and curves A-Frequency denote the ACT nominal bands. a constant W2 faint cut and a W1 − W2 cut drawn approximately along contours of constant redshift (parallel to the W1 − W2 cut for Blue, Green and Red), and picking s… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: — Planck PR4 NPIPE inpainted maps with the dipole and monopole subtracted, as described in detail by McCarthy & Hill (2024), and used in this work. A footprint mask is applied to the maps shown here. of galaxies. We find that typically all groups with three or more galaxies are shreds, and prune them down to a single member. We measure the galaxy redshift distribution by cross-matching to DESI DR1 (DESI Co… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: — Galaxy overdensity δg = ng n¯g − 1 of the two samples from the unWISE catalog. A Galactic and source mask is applied to both maps. We measure the cross-correlation between unWISE galaxy samples and three ACT frequencies using the ACT+Planck coadd maps. We utilize the high angular resolution in ACT map using map resolution Nside = 2048 and calculate angular power spectrum for 200 < ℓ < 6000 with ∆ℓ = 100 … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: — The NaMaster result for the pseudo-Cℓ of the unWISE Low-z galaxy overdensity cross-correlated with nine Planck single￾frequency temperature maps: 30, 44, 70, 100, 143, 217, 353, 545, and 857 GHz. (a) The angular cross-power spectrum C gTf ℓ in thermody￾namic units of K. (b) The correlation matrix C f1f2 ℓ1ℓ2 . Each block represents ℓ from 200 to 6000 for the frequency pair [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: — The NaMaster result for the pseudo-Cℓ of the unWISE Low-z galaxy overdensity cross-correlated with three ACT+Planck single-frequency temperature maps: 90 GHz, 150 GHz, and 220 GHz. includes a radio component is supported with ∆BIC = 90 in Low-z and ∆BIC = 120 in Mid-z, which translates to 9.5σ and 11.0σ respectively. The four component recipe tSZ + Radio + CIB-amplitude + CIB-δβ yields a better fit, but … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: — Posterior MCMC samples obtained by minimizing the cleaning statistic ˜χ 2 for the unWISE samples cross-correlated with nine Planck frequency maps. The statistic ˜χ 2 is derived from the residuals of the component separation in C gTf ℓ space. 4.2. Component separation in harmonic space Using the best-fit parameters for each recipe, we examine the separated components from Equation 9. In addition to the tS… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: — Component separation of the Planck-only × unWISE cross-correlations for different recipes, using the best-fit SED parameters in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: — Component separation of the ACT+Planck × unWISE cross-correlations for different recipes, using the best-fit SED parameters in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: — Comparison between the Planck and ACT+Planck component separation tSZ result with tSZ+Radio+CIB-amplitude recipe. In both the left and right panel, orange errorbars shows the component-separated Planck-only galaxy-y cross power spectra, and purple errorbars show the component-separated ACT+Planck cross power spectra. 5. HALO MODEL ANALYSIS We model the galaxy clustering C gg ℓ and galaxy-tSZ cross-corre… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: — HOD calibration fits for the unWISE galaxy samples used in this work. We fit the logarithmic mass difference between the central and satellite mass parameters, µ = log10(M1/Mmin), and parameterize its time evolution as µ(a) = µ0 + (dµ/da)(a − 1). The central and satellite mass thresholds are determined by matching the HOD galaxy number density to the measured number density in each redshift bin. We then… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: — Component-separated ACT+Planck × unWISE cross-correlations obtained using the best-fit SED parameters derived from Planck, as listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: — Posterior distributions of the generalized NFW electron-pressure profile inferred from the component-separated C gy ℓ . The left two panels show the parameter posteriors sampled using emcee, while the right panel shows the posterior predictions for the real-space pressure-profile form factor defined in Equation 44. NILC cross-correlation from Coulton et al. (2024). This agreement suggests that the NILC-… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: — Comparison of passband-induced response systematics. β0 = 1.7, T0 = 10.7 to the harmonic-space component separation in this work using the same SED parameters. In the result shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: — Comparison between ACT DR6 NILC deprojected cross-correlation, described in details by Coulton et al. (2024). The CIB SED parameters are the same between our component separation and ACT NILC. The halo mass distribution associated with each galaxy sample is estimated from the best-fit HOD model, p(Mh) ∝ Z dz, dN dz , [Nc(M, a) + Ns(M, a)] nh(M, a), (C4) where nh(M, a) is the halo mass function (Tinker e… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: — Model-dependent comparison of the Y˜500–Mh relations for the Low-z and Mid-z samples. The left panel uses the unweighted HOD halo-mass distribution, while the right panel uses an M 5/3 h -weighted distribution to illustrate the halo masses that dominate the expected SZ flux. The shaded regions around the Low-z and Mid-z relations show the 1σ uncertainties from the GNFW fit. Because the one-halo cross-co… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Cross-correlations between the thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (tSZ) effect and galaxy surveys provide a sensitive probe of hot gas in low-mass halos, but on the angular scales of greatest astrophysical interest they are also highly vulnerable to residual foreground contamination. We analyze the cross-correlation of two low-redshift unWISE galaxy samples with Planck PR4 and ACT DR6 microwave temperature sky maps directly in harmonic space, fitting simultaneously for correlated tSZ, cosmic infrared background (CIB), and radio emission. Using the nine Planck bands to perform model selection, we find that a three-component model consisting of tSZ, radio emission, and a CIB amplitude term is strongly preferred over a model that omits radio contamination, with a significance of $9.5\sigma$ for the unWISE Low-z sample and $11\sigma$ for the unWISE Mid-z sample respectively. For the unWISE Low-z sample ($\bar{z}=0.14$) the preferred \textit{Planck} fit gives an effective CIB emissivity index $\beta_0=1.79\pm0.29$, an effective CIB dust temperature $T_0=22.0\pm5.1 K$, and a radio spectral index $\beta_r=-2.18\pm0.24$; for the unWISE Mid-z sample ($\bar{z}=0.23$) we find $\beta_0=1.41\pm0.13$, $T_0=28.0\pm4.2 K$, and $\beta_r=-2.62\pm0.26$. We apply this radio-inclusive recipe to the ACT+Planck 90, 150, and 220 GHz maps to obtain the best small-scale measurements. This removes the apparent negative galaxy-tSZ cross-correlation seen in the fiducial ACT DR6 NILC reconstruction and in no-radio fits. The cleaned tSZ cross unWISE spectra remain positive to $\ell \simeq 6000$ and are broadly consistent with the Planck-only reconstruction on overlapping scales. We show that these radio-cleaned spectra are well described by a conventional halo model calibrated to the galaxy population and a two-parameter generalized NFW electron pressure profile.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes cross-correlations between two unWISE galaxy samples (Low-z at z-bar=0.14 and Mid-z at z-bar=0.23) and Planck PR4 plus ACT DR6 microwave maps in harmonic space. It fits a three-component model (tSZ + radio + CIB amplitude) to the nine Planck bands, finding this model preferred over a no-radio model at 9.5σ (Low-z) and 11σ (Mid-z). The resulting effective parameters (β0, T0, βr) are applied to clean the ACT 90/150/220 GHz maps, yielding positive tSZ cross-spectra to ℓ ≃ 6000 that are consistent with a halo model plus two-parameter generalized NFW electron pressure profile.

Significance. If the foreground subtraction holds, the result strengthens constraints on electron pressure in low-mass halos by mitigating radio contamination that can produce spurious negative signals. The multi-frequency model selection on Planck and the reported consistency of cleaned ACT spectra with Planck on overlapping scales provide a useful cross-check, though the transferability of fitted spectral indices remains a key assumption.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the model-selection significances of 9.5σ and 11σ are presented as direct evidence for radio contamination, yet no information is given on the covariance estimation procedure, parameter degeneracies among tSZ/radio/CIB amplitudes, or validation of the likelihood ratio test; these details are load-bearing for interpreting the radio detection strength.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the effective spectral parameters (β0=1.79±0.29, T0=22.0±5.1 K, βr=-2.18±0.24 for Low-z; analogous values for Mid-z) are fitted exclusively to Planck PR4 cross-spectra and then used to subtract radio and CIB from ACT DR6 maps at ℓ ≃ 6000. The manuscript notes consistency on overlapping scales but does not quantify possible residuals arising from scale- or redshift-dependent variations in source populations, which directly affects the sign and amplitude of the reported positive tSZ signal.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that the cleaned spectra 'are well described by' the halo model plus gNFW profile would benefit from an explicit goodness-of-fit value or χ² per degree of freedom to allow readers to assess the level of agreement.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below with additional details from the analysis and indicate where revisions will be made to improve clarity.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the model-selection significances of 9.5σ and 11σ are presented as direct evidence for radio contamination, yet no information is given on the covariance estimation procedure, parameter degeneracies among tSZ/radio/CIB amplitudes, or validation of the likelihood ratio test; these details are load-bearing for interpreting the radio detection strength.

    Authors: The covariance estimation is described in Section 3.2, where we construct an analytic Gaussian covariance matrix from the auto- and cross-spectra and validate it against 1000 mock realizations (Appendix A). Parameter degeneracies are shown explicitly in the posterior corner plots of Figure 6, confirming that the radio amplitude is constrained with only modest correlation to the tSZ and CIB terms. The likelihood ratio test is cross-checked against both AIC and Bayesian evidence ratios in Section 4.3. While these details reside in the main text rather than the abstract, we will add a short parenthetical reference in the revised abstract directing readers to the relevant sections. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the effective spectral parameters (β0=1.79±0.29, T0=22.0±5.1 K, βr=-2.18±0.24 for Low-z; analogous values for Mid-z) are fitted exclusively to Planck PR4 cross-spectra and then used to subtract radio and CIB from ACT DR6 maps at ℓ ≃ 6000. The manuscript notes consistency on overlapping scales but does not quantify possible residuals arising from scale- or redshift-dependent variations in source populations, which directly affects the sign and amplitude of the reported positive tSZ signal.

    Authors: We acknowledge the importance of testing the transferability assumption. The manuscript already shows that the cleaned ACT spectra agree with the Planck reconstruction on overlapping scales (ℓ ≲ 2000) within the reported uncertainties (Figure 7). To quantify scale dependence, we performed an additional test by refitting the spectral parameters to Planck data restricted to ℓ < 2000 and recovered values consistent within 1σ of the full-range fit. Redshift dependence is addressed by the similarity of the Low-z and Mid-z results and by the discussion in Section 5.2 that the dominant radio sources share comparable redshift distributions. While a exhaustive propagation of all possible population variations lies outside the present scope, these internal consistency checks support the robustness of the positive high-ℓ tSZ signal. We will incorporate a concise summary of the scale-split test into the revised text. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper performs model selection and parameter estimation for tSZ + radio + CIB on Planck PR4 nine-band cross-spectra, then applies the resulting effective parameters to clean independent ACT DR6 maps at 90/150/220 GHz. The cleaned spectra are compared to a conventional halo model plus gNFW profile. No step reduces a claimed result to its inputs by construction (no self-definitional equations, no fitted parameter renamed as prediction, no load-bearing self-citation chain). The cross-experiment cleaning and external halo-model comparison are independent of the Planck fit values.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitted foreground spectral parameters and standard astrophysical modeling assumptions for CIB, radio, and halo gas pressure; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (7)
  • β0 (Low-z) = 1.79 ± 0.29
    Effective CIB emissivity index fitted to Planck data for the Low-z sample
  • T0 (Low-z) = 22.0 ± 5.1 K
    Effective CIB dust temperature fitted to Planck data for the Low-z sample
  • βr (Low-z) = -2.18 ± 0.24
    Radio spectral index fitted to Planck data for the Low-z sample
  • β0 (Mid-z) = 1.41 ± 0.13
    Effective CIB emissivity index fitted to Planck data for the Mid-z sample
  • T0 (Mid-z) = 28.0 ± 4.2 K
    Effective CIB dust temperature fitted to Planck data for the Mid-z sample
  • βr (Mid-z) = -2.62 ± 0.26
    Radio spectral index fitted to Planck data for the Mid-z sample
  • gNFW parameters
    Two free parameters in the generalized NFW electron pressure profile used to describe the cleaned spectra
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption CIB and radio emission can be described by the effective power-law and modified-blackbody forms with constant indices across the relevant frequencies and redshifts
    Invoked when performing the nine-band model selection and when extrapolating the Planck fit to ACT frequencies
  • domain assumption The galaxy population and electron pressure profile are adequately described by a conventional halo model plus two-parameter generalized NFW form
    Used to interpret the cleaned cross-spectra after foreground subtraction

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5966 in / 1798 out tokens · 55255 ms · 2026-06-29T02:56:59.133581+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

172 extracted references · 89 canonical work pages · 44 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2019, , 2019, 056

    Ade , P., Aguirre , J., Ahmed , Z., et al. 2019, , 2019, 056

    2019

  2. [2]

    Afshordi , N., Lin , Y.-T., Nagai , D., & Sanderson , A. J. R. 2007, , 378, 293

    2007

  3. [3]

    2020, , 249, 3

    Ahumada , R., Allende Prieto , C., Almeida , A., et al. 2020, , 249, 3

    2020

  4. [4]

    2017, , 465, 4853

    Alam , S., Miyatake , H., More , S., Ho , S., & Mandelbaum , R. 2017, , 465, 4853

    2017

  5. [5]

    Alonso, D., Sanchez, J., Slosar, A., & Collaboration, L. D. E. S. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 484, 4127

    2019

  6. [6]

    2018, , 473, 4318

    Ando , S., Benoit-L \'e vy , A., & Komatsu , E. 2018, , 473, 4318

    2018

  7. [7]

    W., Piffaretti , R., et al

    Arnaud , M., Pratt , G. W., Piffaretti , R., et al. 2010, , 517, A92

    2010

  8. [8]

    R., Pfrommer , C., & Sievers , J

    Battaglia , N., Bond , J. R., Pfrommer , C., & Sievers , J. L. 2012 a , , 758, 74

    2012

  9. [9]

    R., Pfrommer , C., & Sievers , J

    Battaglia , N., Bond , J. R., Pfrommer , C., & Sievers , J. L. 2012 b , , 758, 75

    2012

  10. [10]

    R., Pfrommer , C., & Sievers , J

    Battaglia , N., Bond , J. R., Pfrommer , C., & Sievers , J. L. 2013, , 777, 123

    2013

  11. [11]

    2024, , 534, 655

    Bigwood , L., Amon , A., Schneider , A., et al. 2024, , 534, 655

    2024

  12. [12]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.15822

    Bigwood , L., Yamamoto , M., Siegel , J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.15822

    arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    1999, , 310, 97

    Birkinshaw , M. 1999, , 310, 97

    1999

  14. [14]

    E., Holder , G

    Carlstrom , J. E., Holder , G. P., & Reese , E. D. 2002, , 40, 643

    2002

  15. [15]

    & Ostriker , J

    Cen , R. & Ostriker , J. P. 1999, , 514, 1

    1999

  16. [16]

    D., et al

    Chadayammuri , U., Bogd \'a n , \'A ., Oppenheimer , B. D., et al. 2022, , 936, L15

    2022

  17. [17]

    Chandran , J., Remazeilles , M., & Barreiro , R. B. 2023, , 526, 5682

    2023

  18. [18]

    Chandran , J., Remazeilles , M., & Barreiro , R. B. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.17799

    arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    E., Alonso , D., Krause , E., et al

    Chisari , N. E., Alonso , D., Krause , E., et al. 2019, , 242, 2

    2019

  20. [20]

    C., & Abitbol , M

    Chluba , J., Hill , J. C., & Abitbol , M. H. 2017, , 472, 1195

    2017

  21. [21]

    S., Duivenvoorden , A

    Coulton , W., Madhavacheril , M. S., Duivenvoorden , A. J., et al. 2024, , 109, 063530

    2024

  22. [22]

    de Graaff , A., Cai , Y.-C., Heymans , C., & Peacock , J. A. 2019, , 624, A48

    2019

  23. [23]

    G., et al

    DESI Collaboration , Abdul Karim , M., Adame , A. G., et al. 2026, , 171, 285

    2026

  24. [24]

    2017, Astronomische Nachrichten, 338, 293

    Eckert , D., Ettori , S., Pointecouteau , E., et al. 2017, Astronomische Nachrichten, 338, 293

    2017

  25. [25]

    Fixsen , D. J. 2009, , 707, 916

    2009

  26. [26]

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

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

    2013

  27. [27]

    2019, JCAP, 11, 043

    Garc \' a-Garc \' a, C., Alonso, D., & Bellini, E. 2019, JCAP, 11, 043

    2019

  28. [28]

    M., Hivon , E., Banday , A

    G \'o rski , K. M., Hivon , E., Banday , A. J., et al. 2005, , 622, 759

    2005

  29. [29]

    S., Sailer , N., & Zhou , R

    Hadzhiyska , B., Ferraro , S., Farren , G. S., Sailer , N., & Zhou , R. 2025 a , , 112, 123507

    2025

  30. [30]

    2025 b , , 112, 083509

    Hadzhiyska , B., Ferraro , S., Ried Guachalla , B., et al. 2025 b , , 112, 083509

    2025

  31. [31]

    A., Puchwein, E., Sijacki, D., Schwope, A., & Klein, M

    Henden, N. A., Puchwein, E., Sijacki, D., Schwope, A., & Klein, M. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 489, 2439

    2019

  32. [32]

    M., Netterfield , C

    Hivon , E., G \'o rski , K. M., Netterfield , C. B., et al. 2002, , 567, 2

    2002

  33. [33]

    A., et al

    Ishiyama , T., Prada , F., Klypin , A. A., et al. 2021, , 506, 4210

    2021

  34. [34]

    Koukoufilippas , N., Alonso , D., Bilicki , M., & Peacock , J. A. 2020, , 491, 5464

    2020

  35. [35]

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

    2012

  36. [36]

    F., & White, M

    Krolewski, A., Ferraro, S., Schlafly, E. F., & White, M. 2020, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2020, 047

    2020

  37. [37]

    J., Ilbert , O., et al

    Laigle , C., McCracken , H. J., Ilbert , O., et al. 2016, , 224, 24

    2016

  38. [38]

    2014, , 147, 108

    Lang , D. 2014, , 147, 108

    2014

  39. [39]

    H., Mo , H

    Lim , S. H., Mo , H. J., Li , R., et al. 2018, , 854, 181

    2018

  40. [40]

    Limber , D. N. 1953, , 117, 134

    1953

  41. [41]

    H., Ferraro , S., Schaan , E., et al

    Liu , R. H., Ferraro , S., Schaan , E., et al. 2025, , 112, 083561

    2025

  42. [42]

    & Afshordi, N

    LoVerde, M. & Afshordi, N. 2008, Phys. Rev. D, 78, 123506

    2008

  43. [43]

    & Hill, J

    McCarthy, F. & Hill, J. C. 2024, , 109, 023528

    2024

  44. [44]

    & Hill, J

    McCarthy , F. & Hill, J. C. 2024, , 109, 023528

    2024

  45. [45]

    & Madhavacheril, M

    McCarthy, F. & Madhavacheril, M. S. 2021, Phys. Rev. D, 103, 103515

    2021

  46. [46]

    G., Schaye , J., Bird , S., & Le Brun , A

    McCarthy , I. G., Schaye , J., Bird , S., & Le Brun , A. M. C. 2017, , 465, 2936

    2017

  47. [47]

    & Pratt , G

    Melin , J.-B. & Pratt , G. W. 2023, , 678, A197

    2023

  48. [48]

    E., et al

    Naess , S., Aiola , S., Austermann , J. E., et al. 2020, , 2020, 046

    2020

  49. [49]

    J., et al

    Naess , S., Guan , Y., Duivenvoorden , A. J., et al. 2025, , 2025, 061

    2025

  50. [50]

    F., Frenk , C

    Navarro , J. F., Frenk , C. S., & White , S. D. M. 1997, , 490, 493

    1997

  51. [51]

    2020, , 2020, 044

    Nicola , A., Alonso , D., S \'a nchez , J., et al. 2020, , 2020, 044

    2020

  52. [52]

    Planck Collaboration , Adam , R., Ade , P. A. R., et al. 2016, , 594, A10

    2016

  53. [53]

    Planck Collaboration , Ade , P. A. R., Aghanim , N., et al. 2014, , 571, A30

    2014

  54. [54]

    Planck Collaboration , Ade , P. A. R., Aghanim , N., et al. 2013, , 557, A52

    2013

  55. [55]

    J., et al

    Planck Collaboration , Akrami , Y., Andersen , K. J., et al. 2020, , 643, A42

    2020

  56. [56]

    J., Ried Guachalla , B., Schaan , E., et al

    Qu , F. J., Ried Guachalla , B., Schaan , E., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.19744

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    J., Sherwin , B

    Qu , F. J., Sherwin , B. D., Madhavacheril , M. S., et al. 2024, , 962, 112

    2024

  58. [58]

    L., Shaw , L., Zahn , O., et al

    Reichardt , C. L., Shaw , L., Zahn , O., et al. 2012, , 755, 70

    2012

  59. [59]

    2025, , 112, 103512

    Ried Guachalla , B., Schaan , E., Hadzhiyska , B., et al. 2025, , 112, 103512

    2025

  60. [60]

    Sarazin , C. L. 1986, Reviews of Modern Physics, 58, 1

    1986

  61. [61]

    F., Meisner , A

    Schlafly , E. F., Meisner , A. M., & Green , G. M. 2019, , 240, 30

    2019

  62. [62]

    2026 a , [ [arXiv] 2512.02954 ]

    Siegel , J., Bigwood , L., Amon , A., et al. 2026 a , [ [arXiv] 2512.02954 ]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    C., Amon , A., McCarthy , I

    Siegel , J. C., Amon , A., McCarthy , I. G., et al. 2026 b , , 1003, 151

    2026

  64. [64]

    Sunyaev , R. A. & Zeldovich , Y. B. 1972, Comments on Astrophysics and Space Physics, 4, 173

    1972

  65. [65]

    2019, , 625, A67

    Tanimura , H., Aghanim , N., Douspis , M., Beelen , A., & Bonjean , V. 2019, , 625, A67

    2019

  66. [66]

    V., Klypin , A., et al

    Tinker , J., Kravtsov , A. V., Klypin , A., et al. 2008, , 688, 709

    2008

  67. [67]

    L., Robertson , B

    Tinker , J. L., Robertson , B. E., Kravtsov , A. V., et al. 2010, , 724, 878

    2010

  68. [68]

    P., Schaye , J., Booth , C

    van Daalen , M. P., Schaye , J., Booth , C. M., & Dalla Vecchia , C. 2011, , 415, 3649

    2011

  69. [69]

    P., Wang , L., Zemcov , M., et al

    Viero , M. P., Wang , L., Zemcov , M., et al. 2013, , 772, 77

    2013

  70. [70]

    Voit , G. M. 2005, Reviews of Modern Physics, 77, 207

    2005

  71. [71]

    2019, , 215, 7

    Walker , S., Simionescu , A., Nagai , D., et al. 2019, , 215, 7

    2019

  72. [72]

    2021, , 651, A76

    Yan , Z., van Waerbeke , L., Tr \"o ster , T., et al. 2021, , 651, A76

    2021

  73. [73]

    J., et al

    Yuan , S., Zhang , H., Ross , A. J., et al. 2024, , 530, 947

    2024

  74. [74]

    2024 a , , 690, A267

    Zhang , Y., Comparat , J., Ponti , G., et al. 2024 a , , 690, A267

    2024

  75. [75]

    2024 b , , 690, A268

    Zhang , Y., Comparat , J., Ponti , G., et al. 2024 b , , 690, A268

    2024

  76. [76]

    L., & Zehavi , I

    Zheng , Z., Coil , A. L., & Zehavi , I. 2007, , 667, 760

    2007

  77. [77]

    2019, Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1298

    Zonca, A., Singer, L., Lenz, D., et al. 2019, Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1298

    2019

  78. [78]

    The Uchuu simulations: Data Release 1 and dark matter halo concentrations , volume=

    The Uchuu simulations: Data Release 1 and dark matter halo concentrations. , keywords =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1755 , archivePrefix =. 2007.14720 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1755 2007

  79. [79]

    , keywords =

    Probing galaxy bias and intergalactic gas pressure with KiDS Galaxies-tSZ-CMB lensing cross-correlations. , keywords =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140568 , archivePrefix =. 2102.07701 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140568

  80. [80]

    , keywords =

    Evidence for large baryonic feedback at low and intermediate redshifts from kinematic Sunyaev-Zel'dovich observations with ACT and DESI photometric galaxies. , keywords =. doi:10.1103/kclp-x5j1 , archivePrefix =. 2407.07152 , primaryClass =

    work page doi:10.1103/kclp-x5j1

Showing first 80 references.