Search

We describe features of the X-ray: Generate and Analyse (XGA) open-source software package that have been developed to facilitate automated hydrostatic mass ($M_{\rm hydro}$) measurements from XMM X-ray observations of clusters of galaxies. This includes describing how XGA measures global, and radial, X-ray properties of galaxy clusters. We then demonstrate the reliability of XGA by comparing simple X-ray properties, namely the X-ray temperature and gas mass, with published values presented by the XMM Cluster Survey (XCS), the Ultimate XMM eXtragaLactic survey project (XXL), and the Local Cluster Substructure Survey (LoCuSS). XGA measured values for temperature are, on average, within 1% of the values reported in the literature for each sample. XGA gas masses for XXL clusters are shown to be ${\sim}$10% lower than previous measurements (though the difference is only significant at the $\sim$1.8$\sigma$ level), LoCuSS $R_{2500}$ and $R_{500}$ gas mass re-measurements are 3% and 7% lower respectively (representing a 1.5$\sigma$ and 3.5$\sigma$ difference). Like-for-like comparisons of hydrostatic mass are made to LoCuSS results, which show that our measurements are $10{\pm}3%$ ($19{\pm}7%$) higher for $R_{2500}$ ($R_{500}$). The comparison between $R_{500}$ masses shows significant scatter. Finally, we present new $M_{\rm hydro}$ measurements for 104 clusters from the SDSS DR8 redMaPPer XCS sample (SDSSRM-XCS). Our SDSSRM-XCS hydrostatic mass measurements are in good agreement with multiple literature estimates, and represent one of the largest samples of consistently measured hydrostatic masses. We have demonstrated that XGA is a powerful tool for X-ray analysis of clusters; it will render complex-to-measure X-ray properties accessible to non-specialists., Comment: 24 pages (18 + 6 appendices), 15 figures, submitted to MNRAS; see https://github.com/DavidT3/XCS-Mass-Paper-I-Analysis for the code and samples

We use Dark Energy Survey Year 3 (DES Y3) clusters with archival X-ray data from XMM-Newton and Chandra to assess the centering performance of the redMaPPer cluster finder and to measure key richness observable scaling relations. In terms of centering, we find that 10-20% of redMaPPer clusters are miscentered with no significant difference in bins of low versus high richness ($20<\lambda<40$ and $\lambda>40$) or redshift ($0.2

We cross-match and compare characteristics of galaxy clusters identified in observations from two sky surveys using two completely different techniques. One sample is optically selected from the analysis of three years of Dark Energy Survey observations using the redMaPPer cluster detection algorithm. The second is X-ray selected from XMM observations analysed by the XMM Cluster Survey. The samples comprise a total area of 57.4 deg$^2$, bounded by the area of 4 contiguous XMM survey regions that overlap the DES footprint. We find that the X-ray selected sample is fully matched with entries in the redMaPPer catalogue, above $\lambda>$20 and within 0.1$< z <$0.9. Conversely, only 38\% of the redMaPPer catalogue is matched to an X-ray extended source. Next, using 120 optically clusters and 184 X-ray selected clusters, we investigate the form of the X-ray luminosity-temperature ($L_{X}-T_{X}$), luminosity-richness ($L_{X}-\lambda$) and temperature-richness ($T_{X}-\lambda$) scaling relations. We find that the fitted forms of the $L_{X}-T_{X}$ relations are consistent between the two selection methods and also with other studies in the literature. However, we find tentative evidence for a steepening of the slope of the relation for low richness systems in the X-ray selected sample. When considering the scaling of richness with X-ray properties, we again find consistency in the relations (i.e., $L_{X}-\lambda$ and $T_{X}-\lambda$) between the optical and X-ray selected samples. This is contrary to previous similar works that find a significant increase in the scatter of the luminosity scaling relation for X-ray selected samples compared to optically selected samples., Comment: Accepted for publication to MNRAS

In this paper we present the X-ray analysis of SDSS DR8 redMaPPer (SDSSRM) clusters using data products from the $XMM$ Cluster Survey (XCS). In total, 1189 SDSSRM clusters fall within the $XMM$-Newton footprint. This has yielded 456 confirmed detections accompanied by X-ray luminosity ($L_{X}$) measurements. Of the detected clusters, 382 have an associated X-ray temperature measurement ($T_{X}$). This represents one of the largest samples of coherently derived cluster $T_{X}$ values to date. Our analysis of the X-ray observable to richness ($\lambda$) scaling relations has demonstrated that scatter in the $T_{X}-\lambda$ relation is roughly a third of that in the $L_{X}-\lambda$ relation, and that the $L_{X}-\lambda$ scatter is intrinsic, i.e. will not be significantly reduced with larger sample sizes. Our analysis of the scaling relation between $L_{X}$ and $T_{X}$ has shown that the fits are sensitive to the selection method of the sample, i.e. whether the sample is made up of clusters detected "serendipitously" compared to those deliberately targeted by $XMM$. These differences are also seen in the $L_{X}-\lambda$ relation and, to a lesser extent, in the $T_{X}-\lambda$ relation. Exclusion of the emission from the cluster core does not make a significant impact to the findings. A combination of selection biases is a likely, but as yet unproven, reason for these differences. Finally, we have also used our data to probe recent claims of anisotropy in the $L_{X}-T_{X}$ relation across the sky. We find no evidence of anistropy, but stress that this may be masked in our analysis by the incomplete declination coverage of the SDSS DR8 sample., Comment: 23 pages, 20 figures, Accepted for publication to MNRAS

We present the first comparison between properties of clusters of galaxies detected by the eROSITA Final Equatorial-Depth Survey (eFEDS) and the XMM Cluster Survey (XCS). We have compared, in an ensemble fashion, properties from the eFEDS X-ray cluster catalogue with those from the Ultimate XMM eXtragaLactic (XXL) survey project (XXL-100-GC). We find the distributions of redshift and X-ray temperature ($T_{\rm X}$) to be broadly similar between the two surveys, with a larger proportion of clusters above 4 keV in the XXL-100-GC sample. We find 62 eFEDS cluster candidates with XMM data (eFEDS-XMM sample); 10 do not have good enough XMM data to confirm or deny, 11 are classed as sample contaminants, and 4 have their X-ray flux contaminated by another source. The majority of eFEDS-XMM sources have a longer exposure in XMM than eFEDS, and the majority of eFEDS positions are within 100 kpc of XCS positions. Our eFEDS-XCS sample of 37 clusters is used to calculate minimum sample contamination fractions of ${\sim}$18% and ${\sim}$9% in the eFEDS X-ray and optically confirmed samples respectively, in general agreement with eFEDS findings. We compare 29 X-ray luminosities ($L_{\rm X}$) measured by eFEDS and XCS, which are in excellent agreement. Eight clusters have a $T_{\rm X}$ measured by XMM and eROSITA, and we find that XMM temperatures are 25$\pm$9% larger than their eROSITA counterparts. Finally, we construct $L_{\rm X}$ - $T_{\rm X}$ scaling relations based on eFEDS and XCS measurements, which are in tension; the tension is decreased when we measure a third scaling relation with calibrated XCS temperatures., Comment: 20 pages (13 + 7 appendices), 16 figures, submitted to MNRAS

We measure the velocity dispersions of clusters of galaxies selected by the redMaPPer algorithm in the first three years of data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES), allowing us to probe cluster selection and richness estimation, $\lambda$, in light of cluster dynamics. Our sample consists of 126 clusters with sufficient spectroscopy for individual velocity dispersion estimates. We examine the correlations between cluster velocity dispersion, richness, X-ray temperature and luminosity as well as central galaxy velocity offsets. The velocity dispersion-richness relation exhibits a bimodal distribution. The majority of clusters follow scaling relations between velocity dispersion, richness, and X-ray properties similar to those found for previous samples; however, there is a significant population of clusters with velocity dispersions which are high for their richness. These clusters account for roughly 22\% of the $\lambda < 70$ systems in our sample, but more than half (55\%) of $\lambda < 70$ clusters at $z>0.5$. A couple of these systems are hot and X-ray bright as expected for massive clusters with richnesses that appear to have been underestimated, but most appear to have high velocity dispersions for their X-ray properties likely due to line-of-sight structure. These results suggest that projection effects contribute significantly to redMaPPer selection, particularly at higher redshifts and lower richnesses. The redMaPPer determined richnesses for the velocity dispersion outliers are consistent with their X-ray properties, but several are X-ray undetected and deeper data is needed to understand their nature., Comment: 22 pages, accepted to MNRAS