Figure 1: Comparison of various mass functions. The dotted line represents Sheth & Tormen (2002) prediction, the solid line that of Jenkins et al. (2001) and the dashed line that of Del Popolo (2000b). | |
Open with DEXTER |
Figure 2: a) The confidence contours for the parameters n, and for the open model. The dashed lines are lines of constant . b) (likelihood) for the parameter . The solid line is obtained from the model of this paper while the dotted line is that calculated by Henry (2000). The dashed lines represent various confidence levels (65%, 90%, 95%, 99%). c) The confidence contours for the parameters , and for the open model (see also Henry 2000, Fig. 9). d) Constraints on and obtained using the same 25 clusters used in Henry (2000), for the local sample, while the high redshift sample is constituted from all the EMSS clusters with z>0.3 and RX J0152.7-1357 (see Henry 2002). The solid lines are the 1 and 2 contours obtained using the mass function and the M-T relation of this paper, while the dashed line is the 1 contour obtained using the PS mass function and the M-T relation of Pierpaoli et al. (2001). | |
Open with DEXTER |
Figure 3: for (left panel) and (right panel), marginalized over the other two parameters ((, ), left panel and ( , ), right panel). Solid lines are the prediction obtained from the model of this paper while the dotted lines those obtained from Eke et al. (1998). Dashed lines are 1 and 2 significance and the 3 corresponds to the top of each panel. | |
Open with DEXTER |