Researcher profile

Alex Saro

Alex Saro contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Cosmology dependence of galaxy cluster scaling relations

The abundance of galaxy clusters as a function of mass and redshift is a well known powerful cosmological probe, which relies on underlying modelling assumptions on the mass-observable relations (MOR). Some of the MOR parameters can be constrained directly from multi-wavelength observations, as the normalization at some reference cosmology, the mass-slope, the redshift evolution and the intrinsic scatter. However, the cosmology dependence of MORs cannot be tested with multi-wavelength observations alone. We use {\tt Magneticum} simulations to explore the cosmology dependence of galaxy cluster scaling relations. We run fifteen hydro-dynamical cosmological simulations varying $Ω_m$, $Ω_b$, $h_0$ and $σ_8$ (around a reference cosmological model). The MORs considered are gas mass, baryonic mass, gas temperature, $Y$ and velocity dispersion as a function of virial mass. We verify that the mass and redshift slopes and the intrinsic scatter of the MORs are nearly independent of cosmology with variations significantly smaller than current observational uncertainties. We show that the gas mass and baryonic mass sensitively depends only on the baryon fraction, velocity dispersion and gas temperature on $h_0$, and $Y$ on both baryon fraction and $h_0$. We investigate the cosmological implications of our MOR parameterization on a mock catalog created for an idealized eROSITA-like experiment. We show that our parametrization introduces a strong degeneracy between the cosmological parameters and the normalization of the MOR. Finally, the parameter constraints derived at different overdensity ($Δ_{500c}$), for X-ray bolometric gas luminosity, and for different subgrid physics prescriptions are shown in the appendix.

preprint2015arXiv

Halo mass function: Baryon impact, fitting formulae and implications for cluster cosmology

We use a set of hydrodynamical (Hydro) and dark matter only (DMonly) simulations to calibrate the halo mass function (HMF). We explore the impact of baryons, propose an improved parametrization for spherical overdensity masses and identify differences between our DMonly HMF and previously published HMFs. We use the \textit{Magneticum} simulations, which are well suited because of their accurate treatment of baryons, high resolution, and large cosmological volumes of up to $(3818~\textrm{Mpc})^3$. Baryonic effects globally decrease the masses of galaxy clusters, which, at a given mass, results in a decrease of their number density. This effect vanishes at high redshift $z\sim2$ and for high masses $M_{200\textrm m}\gtrsim10^{14}M\odot$. We perform cosmological analyses of three idealized approximations to the cluster surveys by the South Pole Telescope (SPT), \textit{Planck}, and eROSITA. We pursue two main questions: (1) What is the impact of baryons? -- For the SPT-like and the \textit{Planck}-like samples, the impact of baryons on cosmological results is negligible. In the eROSITA-like case, however, neglecting the baryonic impact leads to an underestimate of $Ω_\textrm m$ by about $0.01$, which is comparable to the expected uncertainty from eROSITA. (2) How does our DMonly HMF compare with previous work? -- For the \textit{Planck}-like sample, results obtained using our DMonly HMF are shifted by $Δ(σ_8)\simeqΔ(σ_8(Ω_\textrm m/0.27)^{0.3})\simeq0.02$ with respect to results obtained using the Tinker et al. (2008) fit. This suggests that using our HMF would shift results from \textit{Planck} clusters toward better agreement with CMB anisotropy measurements. Finally, we discuss biases that can be introduced through inadequate HMF parametrizations that introduce false cosmological sensitivity.