Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Galaxy Cluster Mass Reconstruction Project: II. Quantifying scatter and bias using contrasting mock catalogues|
Mamon, G. A.
Skibba, R. A.
Pearce, F. R.
de Carvalho, R.
Muñoz-Cuartas, J. C.
Gray, M. E.
von der Linden, A.
Merrifield, M. R.
Muldrew, Stuart I.
Pearson, R. J.
Ponman, T. J.
|Publisher:||Oxford University Press (OUP), Royal Astronomical Society|
|Citation:||Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (May 11, 2015) 449 (2): 1897-1920.|
|Abstract:||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 M200c 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.|
|Rights:||This article has been accepted for publication in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society ©: 2015 The Authors Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society. All rights reserved.|
|Appears in Collections:||Published Articles, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy|
Files in This Item:
|MNRAS-2015-Old-1897-920.pdf||Publisher version||8.32 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in LRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.