Paper detail

The Cool-Core Bias in X-ray Galaxy Cluster Samples I: Method And Application To HIFLUGCS

When selecting flux-limited cluster samples, the detection efficiency of X-ray instruments is not the same for centrally-peaked and flat objects, which introduces a bias in flux-limited cluster samples. We quantify this effect in the case of a well-known cluster sample, HIFLUGCS. We simulate a population of X-ray clusters with various surface-brightness profiles, and use the instrumental characteristics of the ROSAT All-Sky Survey (RASS) to select flux-limited samples similar to the HIFLUGCS sample and predict the expected bias. For comparison, we also estimate observationally the bias in the HIFLUGCS sample using XMM-Newton and ROSAT data. We find that the selection of X-ray cluster samples is significantly biased ($\sim29%$) in favor of the peaked, Cool-Core (CC) objects, with respect to Non-Cool-Core (NCC) systems. Interestingly, we find that the bias affects the low-mass, nearby objects (groups, poor clusters) much more than the more luminous objects (i.e massive clusters). We also note a moderate increase of the bias for the more distant systems. Observationally, we propose to select the objects according to their flux in a well-defined physical range excluding the cores, $0.2r_{500}-r_{500}$, to get rid of the bias. From the fluxes in this range, we reject 13 clusters out of the 64 in the HIFLUGCS sample, none of which appears to be NCC. As a result, we estimate that less than half (35-37%) of the galaxy clusters in the local Universe are strong CC. In the paradigm where the CC objects trace relaxed clusters as opposed to unrelaxed, merging objects, this implies that to the present day the majority of the objects are not in a relaxed state. From this result, we estimate a rate of heating events of $\sim1/3$ Gyr$^{-1}$ per dark-matter halo.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 topics

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.