Comparison of Sunyaev-Zel’dovich measurements from Planck and from the Arcminute Microkelvin Imager for 99 galaxy clusters^⋆

¹ Academy of Sciences of Tatarstan, Bauman Str., 20, 420111 Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan, Russia
² Astrophysics Group, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK
e-mail: ycp21@mrao.cam.ac.uk
³ Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array, ALMA Santiago Central Offices, Alonso de Cordova 3107, Vitacura, Casilla 763 0355, Santiago, Chile
⁴ CNRS, IRAP, 9 Av. colonel Roche, BP 44346, 31028 Toulouse Cedex 4, France
⁵ CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science, Australia Telescope National Facility, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia
⁶ DSM/Irfu/SPP, CEA-Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France
⁷ Department of Astronomy and Geodesy, Kazan Federal University, Kremlevskaya Str., 18, 420008 Kazan, Russia
⁸ Dpto. Astrofísica, Universidad de La Laguna (ULL), 38206, La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
⁹ European Southern Observatory, ESO Vitacura, Alonso de Cordova 3107, Vitacura, Casilla 19001, Santiago, Chile
¹⁰ INAF − Osservatorio Astronomico di Roma, via di Frascati 33, 00040 Monte Porzio Catone, Italy
¹¹ Institut d’Astrophysique Spatiale, CNRS (UMR 8617) Université Paris-Sud 11, Bâtiment 121, 91405 Orsay, France
¹² Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0HA, UK
¹³ Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics, University of Oslo, Blindern, 0371 Oslo, Norway
¹⁴ Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, C/Vía Láctea s/n, 38205 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
¹⁵ Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, Alan Turing Building, School of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
¹⁶ Kavli Institute for Cosmology Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0HA, UK
¹⁷ Laboratoire AIM, IRFU/Service d’Astrophysique − CEA/DSM − CNRS − Université Paris Diderot, Bât. 709, CEA-Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France
¹⁸ Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Joseph Fourier Grenoble I, CNRS/IN2P3, Institut National Polytechnique de Grenoble, 53 rue des Martyrs, 38026 Grenoble Cedex, France
¹⁹ Max-Planck-Institut für Extraterrestrische Physik, Giessenbachstraße, 85748 Garching, Germany
²⁰ Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Dolgoprudny, Institutsky per., 9, 141700 Moscow, Russia
²¹ Space Research Institute (IKI), Russian Academy of Sciences, Profsoyuznaya Str, 84/32, 117997 Moscow, Russia
²² Tübitak National Observatory, Akdeniz University Campus, 07058 Antalya, Turkey
²³ Universidad Andrés Bello, Dpto. de Ciencias Físicas, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Astronomía, Campus Casona de Las Condes, Fernández Concha 700, 7591538 Santiago/Las Condes, Chile
²⁴ Université de Toulouse, UPS-OMP, IRAP, 31028 Toulouse Cedex 4, France

Received: 12 May 2014
Accepted: 11 June 2015

Abstract

We present observations and analysis of a sample of 123 galaxy clusters from the 2013 Planck catalogue of Sunyaev-Zel’dovich sources with the Arcminute Microkelvin Imager (AMI), a ground-based radio interferometer. AMI provides an independent measurement with higher angular resolution, 3 arcmin compared to the Planck beams of 5–10 arcmin. The AMI observations thus provide validation of the cluster detections, improved positional estimates, and a consistency check on the fitted size (θ_s) and flux (Y_tot) parameters in the generalised Navarro, Frenk and White (GNFW) model. We detect 99 of the clusters. We use the AMI positional estimates to check the positional estimates and error-bars produced by the Planck algorithms PowellSnakes and MMF3. We find that Y_tot values as measured by AMI are biased downwards with respect to the Planck constraints, especially for high Planck-S/N clusters. We perform simulations to show that this can be explained by deviation from the universal pressure profile shape used to model the clusters. We show that AMI data can constrain the α and β parameters describing the shape of the profile in the GNFW model for individual clusters provided careful attention is paid to the degeneracies between parameters, but one requires information on a wider range of angular scales than are present in AMI data alone to correctly constrain all parameters simultaneously.