The universal galaxy cluster pressure profile from a representative sample of nearby systems (REXCESS) and the Y-SZ-M-500 relation

By M. Arnaud, G. Pratt, R. Piffaretti, H. Boehringer, Judith Croston, E. P. S. D. CEA-Saclay, F. M. Garching, G. U. O. Southampton, UK Cesr, France.. 2009

706 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We investigate the regularity of cluster pressure profiles with REXCESS, a representative sample of 33 local (z < 0.2) clusters drawn from the REFLEX catalogue and observed with XMM-Newton. The sample spans a mass range of 1014 < M500 < 1015 , where M500 is the mass corresponding to a density contrast of 500. We derive an average profile from observations scaled by mass and redshift according to the standard self-similar model, and find that the dispersion about the mean is remarkably low, at less than 30 per cent beyond 0.2 R500, but increases towards the center. Deviations about the mean are related to both the mass and the thermo-dynamical state of the cluster. Morphologically disturbed systems have systematically shallower profiles while cooling core systems are more concentrated. The scaled profiles exhibit a residual mass dependence with a slope of ~0.12, consistent with that expected from the empirically-derived slope of the M500 – YX relation; however, the departure from standard scaling decreases with radius and is consistent with zero at R500. The scatter in the core and departure from self-similar mass scaling is smaller compared to that of the entropy profiles, showing that the pressure is the quantity least affected by dynamical history and non-gravitational physics. Comparison with scaled data from several state of the art numerical simulations shows good agreement outside the core. Combining the observational data in the radial range [0.03–1] R500 with simulation data in the radial range [1–4] R500, we derive a robust measure of the universal pressure profile, that, in an analytical form, defines the physical pressure profile of clusters as a function of mass and redshift up to the cluster “boundary”. Using this profile and direct spherical integration of the observed pressure profiles, we estimate the integrated Compton parameter Y and investigate its scaling with M500 and LX, the soft band X-ray luminosity. We consider both the spherically integrated quantity, Ysph(R), proportional to the gas thermal energy, and the cylindrically integrated quantity, Ycyl(R)=YSZ DA2, which is directly related to the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich (SZ) effect signal. From the low scatter of the observed Ysph(R500) – YX relation we show that variations in pressure profile shape do not introduce extra scatter into the Ysph(R500) – M500 relation as compared to that from the YX – M500 relation. The Ysph(R500) – M500 and Ysph(R500) – LX relations derived from the data are in excellent agreement with those expected from the universal profile. This profile is used to derive the expected YSZ – M500 and YSZ – LX relations for any aperture.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/57397bff3fc06a19ed715e9a159623a5ff8c12cb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: A Measurement of the DR6 CMB Lensing Power Spectrum and Its Implications for Structure Growth (2023, methodology): “We model the cluster signal using the Universal Pressure Profile (UPP) described by Arnaud et al. (2010) and construct a set of 15 filters with different angular sizes by varying the mass and redshift of the cluster model.”
Planck2013 results. XXIX. ThePlanckcatalogue of Sunyaev-Zeldovich sources (2013, methodology): “This study foundD2A Y500/CXSZ YX = 0.95± 0.03, in a good agreement withREXCESS prediction, 0.924± 0.004, of Arnaud et al.(2010).”
The Canadian Cluster Comparison Project: detailed study of systematics and updated weak lensing masses (2015, methodology): “This relation is calibrated using measurements from Arnaud et al. (2010), who studied a sample of 20 nearby relaxed clusters.”
The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Sunyaev-Zel'dovich selected galaxy clusters at 148 GHz from three seasons of data (2013, methodology): “Parameters Am, B and C indicate the level of deviation from the predictions based on the Universal Pressure Profile of [8] (equations (2.”
The pre-launch Planck Sky Model: a model of sky emission at submillimetre to centimetre wavelengths (2012, methodology): “A predicted SZ effect is obtained from known ROSAT and SDSS clusters, for which a model of SZ emission is produced from the universal cluster pressure profile, as presented by Arnaud et al. (2010).”
Planck intermediate results: V. Pressure profiles of galaxy clusters from the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (2012, positive): “…radial quantities has long been shown in X-ray observations (e.g., Arnaud et al. 2001; Pointecouteau et al. 2005; Vikhlinin et al. 2006; Croston et al. 2008; Arnaud et al. 2010), in the optical (e.g., Rines & Diaferio 2006; Wojtak & Lokas 2010), and with weak-lensing (e.g., Postman et al. 2012).”
GALAXY CLUSTERS SELECTED WITH THE SUNYAEV–ZEL'DOVICH EFFECT FROM 2008 SOUTH POLE TELESCOPE OBSERVATIONS (2010, methodology): “To complement the set of maps generated using the semianalytic gas model, SZ sky maps were generated in which the projected form of the Arnaud et al. (2010) pressure profile was used to generate the individual cluster SZ signals.”
Robust weak-lensing mass calibration of Planck galaxy clusters (2014, methodology): “The mass estimates used by the Planck team are based on hydrostatic modeling of XMM-Newton X-ray data for 20 relatively relaxed clusters (Arnaud et al. 2010).”
SEVEN-YEAR WILKINSON MICROWAVE ANISOTROPY PROBE (WMAP) OBSERVATIONS: COSMOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION (2010, methodology): “The profiles differ significantly in the inner parts of clusters, which is also in good agreement with the conclusion of Arnaud et al. (2010): they find that cool-core clusters show much steeper inner profiles than non-cool-core clusters (their Figure 2 and 5).”