Measurement of Galaxy Cluster Sizes, Radial Profiles, and Luminosity Functions from SDSS Photometric Data

Hansen, S. M.; McKay, Timothy A.; Annis, J.; Sheldon, E.; Kimball, Amy

doi:10.1086/444554

Cited by 193 publications

(286 citation statements)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

265

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dispersion does not depend strongly on λ. These values are similar to those reported by Hansen et al (2005) for the MaxBCG cluster finder (σ log 10 (Li) = 0.17, or σMi = 0.425). In Section 2.2, we show that the LRG cuts roughly select galaxies above a fixed absolute magnitude threshold.…”

Section: Non-lrg Redmapper Centralssupporting

confidence: 89%

Luminous red galaxies in clusters: central occupation, spatial distributions and miscentring

Hoshino

Leauthaud

Lackner

et al. 2015

Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Luminous Red Galaxies (LRG) from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey are considered among the best understood samples of galaxies, and they are employed in a broad range of cosmological studies. Because they form a relatively homogeneous population, with high stellar masses and red colors, they are expected to occupy halos in a relatively simple way. In this paper, we study how LRGs occupy massive halos via direct counts in clusters and we reveal several unexpected trends suggesting that the connection between LRGs and dark matter halos may not be straightforward. Using the redMaPPer cluster catalog, we derive the central occupation of LRGs as a function richness, N cen (λ). Assuming no correlation between cluster mass and central galaxy luminosity at fixed richness, we show that clusters contain a significantly lower fraction of central LRGs than predicted from the two-point correlation function. At halo masses of 10 14.5 M , we find N cen = 0.73, compared to N cen of 0.89 from correlation studies. Our central occupation function for LRGs converges to 0.95 at large halo masses. A strong anti-correlation between central luminosity and cluster mass at fixed richness is required to reconcile our results with those based on clustering studies. We also derive P BNC , the probability that the brightest cluster member is not the central galaxy. We find P BNC ≈ 20 − 30% which is a factor of ∼ 2 lower than the value found by Skibba et al. (2011). Finally, we study the radial offsets of bright non-central LRGs from cluster centers and show that bright noncentral LRGs follow a different radial distribution compared to red cluster members, which follow a Navarro-Frank-White profile. This work demonstrates that even the most massive clusters do not always have an LRG at the center, and that the brightest galaxy in a cluster is not always the central galaxy.

show abstract

Section: Non-lrg Redmapper Centralssupporting

confidence: 89%

Luminous red galaxies in clusters: central occupation, spatial distributions and miscentring

Hoshino

Leauthaud

Lackner

et al. 2015

Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several earlier studies attempted to show similarities between LFs in different environments, suggesting the LF as universal function (e.g., Oemler 1974; Gaidos 1997;Colless 1989;De Propris et al 2003). In contrast, a number of studies disagree with the universal shape of LF (e.g., Godwin & Peach 1977;de Filippis et al 2011;Hansen et al 2005;Giodini et al 2012). The luminosity evolution of the bright end and slope of the faint end of the galaxy LF in the field and clusters has been well understood (Bowler et al 2014;Lilly et al 1995;Norberg et al 2002;Willmer et al 2006;Ellis et al 1996;Alshino et al 2010).…”

Section: Composite Luminosity Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of the galaxy luminosity function in progenitors of fossil groups

Gozaliasl

Khosroshahi

Dariush

et al. 2014

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using the semi-analytic models based on the Millennium simulation, we trace back the evolution of the luminosity function of galaxies residing in progenitors of groups classified by the magnitude gap at redshift zero. We determine the luminosity function of galaxies within 0.25 R 200 , 0.5 R 200 , and R 200 for galaxy groups/clusters. The bright end of the galaxy luminosity function of fossil groups shows a significant evolution with redshift, with changes in M * by ∼1−2 mag between z ∼ 0.5 and z = 0 (for the central 0.5 R 200 ), suggesting that the formation of the most luminous galaxy in a fossil group has had a significant impact on the M * galaxies e.g. it is formed as a result of multiple mergers of M * galaxies within the last 5 Gyr. In contrast, the slope of the faint end, α, of the luminosity function shows no considerable redshift evolution and the number of dwarf galaxies in the fossil groups exhibits no evolution, unlike in non-fossil groups where it grows by ∼25−42% towards low redshifts. In agreement with previous studies, we also show that fossil groups accumulate most of their halo mass earlier than non-fossil groups. Selecting the fossils at a redshift of 1 and tracing them to a redshift 0, we show that 80% of the fossil groups (10 13 M h −1 < M 200 < 10 14 M h −1 ) will lose their large magnitude gap. However, about 40% of fossil clusters (M 200 > 10 14 M h −1 ) will retain their large gaps.

show abstract

“…First, the Skibba & Sheth (2009) model is extended by allowing for a dependence of the colour distribution on halo mass at fixed luminosity Hearin & Watson 2013;Rodríguez-Puebla et al 2013), and we include colour gradients within haloes (Hansen et al 2009;van den Bosch et al 2008), which results in red galaxies having higher number density concentrations than blue galaxies in haloes of a given mass (as measured by Collister & Lahav 2005). We include stellar masses based on the Zibetti et al (2009) Wojtak & Mamon (2013) and account for the fact that galaxies and subhaloes are less concentrated than dark matter (e.g., Hansen et al 2005;Yang et al 2005b, Wojtak & Mamon 2013 by adopting concentration index c gal = cDM/1.5. Thirdly, the updated model includes a treatment of dynamically unrelaxed systems, including some non-central brightest halo galaxies, central galaxy velocity bias, and massive substructures, all of which depend on host halo mass (see Skibba & Macciò 2011).…”

Section: Halo Occupation Distribution Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Galaxy Cluster Mass Reconstruction Project – II. Quantifying scatter and bias using contrasting mock catalogues

Old

Wojtak

Mamon

et al. 2015

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is the second in a series in which we perform an extensive comparison of various galaxy-based cluster mass estimation techniques that utilise the positions, velocities and colours of galaxies. Our aim is to quantify the scatter, systematic bias and completeness of cluster masses derived from a diverse set of 25 galaxy-based methods using two contrasting mock galaxy catalogues based on a sophisticated halo occupation model and a semi-analytic model. Analysing 968 clusters, we find a wide range in the RMS errors in log M 200c delivered by the different methods (0.18 to 1.08 dex, i.e., a factor of ∼1.5 to 12), with abundance matching and richness methods providing the best results, irrespective of the input model assumptions. In addition, certain methods produce a significant number of catastrophic cases where the mass is under-or over-estimated by a factor greater than 10. Given the steeply falling high-mass end of the cluster mass function, we recommend that richness or abundance matching-based methods are used in conjunction with these methods as a sanity check for studies selecting high mass clusters. We see a stronger correlation of the recovered to input number of galaxies for both catalogues in comparison with the group/cluster mass, however, this does not guarantee that the correct member galaxies are being selected. We do not observe significantly higher scatter for either mock galaxy catalogues. Our results have implications for cosmological analyses that utilise the masses, richnesses, or abundances of clusters, which have different uncertainties when different methods are used.

show abstract

Measurement of Galaxy Cluster Sizes, Radial Profiles, and Luminosity Functions from SDSS Photometric Data

Cited by 193 publications

References 98 publications

Luminous red galaxies in clusters: central occupation, spatial distributions and miscentring

Luminous red galaxies in clusters: central occupation, spatial distributions and miscentring

Evolution of the galaxy luminosity function in progenitors of fossil groups

Galaxy Cluster Mass Reconstruction Project – II. Quantifying scatter and bias using contrasting mock catalogues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About