Paper detail

redMaPPer II: X-ray and SZ Performance Benchmarks for the SDSS Catalog

We evaluate the performance of the SDSS DR8 redMaPPer photometric cluster catalog by comparing it to overlapping X-ray and SZ selected catalogs from the literature. We confirm the redMaPPer photometric redshifts are nearly unbiased (<Δz> < 0.005), have low scatter (σ_z ~ 0.006-0.02, depending on redshift), and have a low catastrophic failure rate (~ 1%). Both the T_X-λ and Mgas-λ scaling relations are consistent with a mass scatter of σ_{\ln M|λ} ~ 25%, albeit with a ~ 1% outlier rate due to projection effects. This failure rate is somewhat lower than that expected for the full cluster sample, but is consistent with the additional selection effects introduced by our reliance on X-ray and SZ selected reference cluster samples. Where the redMaPPer DR8 catalog is volume limited (z < 0.35), the catalog is 100% complete above T_X > 3.5 keV, and L_X > 2\times 10^{44} erg/s, decreasing to 90% completeness at L_X ~ 10^{43} erg/s. All rich (λ> 100), low redshift (z < 0.25) redMaPPer clusters are X-ray detected in the ROSAT All Sky Survey (RASS), and 86% of the clusters are correctly centered. Compared to other SDSS photometric cluster catalogs, redMaPPer has the highest completeness and purity, and the best photometric redshift performance, though some algorithms do achieve comparable performance to redMaPPer in subsets of the above categories and/or in limited redshift ranges. The redMaPPer richness is clearly the one that best correlates with X-ray temperature and gas mass. Most algorithms (including redMaPPer) have very similar centering performance, with only one exception which performs worse.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.