Paper detail

Cluster correlation functions in N-body simulations

The correlation function of galaxy clusters has often been used as a test of cosmological models. A number of assumptions are implicit in the comparison of theoretical expectations to data. Here we use an ensemble of ten large N-body simulations of the standard cold dark matter cosmology to investigate how cluster selection criteria and other uncertain factors influence the cluster correlation function. We consider the effects of varying the definition of a cluster, the mean number density (or equivalently the richness) in a catalogue, and the assumed normalisation of the model; we also examine the importance of redshift space distortions. We implement five different group-finding algorithms and construct cluster catalogues defined by mass, velocity dispersion or a measure of X-ray luminosity. We find that different cluster catalogues yield correlation functions which can differ by substantially more than the statistical errors in any one determination. For a given cluster selection criteria, the correlation length typically varies by $\sim 20\%$ in catalogues spanning the range of intercluster separations covered by the APM and Abell (richness class $\gsim 1$) catalogues. Distortions produced by peculiar velocities in redshift space enhance the correlation function at large separations and lead to a larger clustering length in redshift space than in real space. The sensitivity of the cluster correlation function to various uncertain model assumptions substantially weakens previous conclusions based on the comparison of model predictions with real data. Detailed modelling of cluster selection procedures including the effects of selecting from projected galaxy catalogues is required before the cluster correlation function can be regarded as a high precision constraint on cosmological models.

preprint1996arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.