The 400d Galaxy Cluster Survey weak lensing programme - III. Evidence for consistent WL and X-ray masses at z ≈ 0.5
A&A, 564 (2014) A129
Published online: 2014-04-17
Articles citing this article
The Citing articles tool gives a list of articles citing the current article.
The citing articles come from EDP Sciences database, as well as other publishers participating in CrossRef Cited-by Linking Program. You can set up your personal account to receive an email alert each time this article is cited by a new article (see the menu on the right-hand side of the abstract page).
Cited article:
This article has been cited by the following article(s):
The hydrostatic-to-lensing mass bias from resolved X-ray and optical-IR data
M. Muñoz-Echeverría, J. F. Macías-Pérez, G. W. Pratt, E. Pointecouteau, I. Bartalucci, M. De Petris, A. Ferragamo, C. Hanser, F. Kéruzoré, F. Mayet, A. Moyer-Anin, A. Paliwal, L. Perotto and G. YepesAstronomy & Astrophysics 682 A147 (2024)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202347584
Gas clumping and its effect on hydrostatic bias in the MACSIS simulations
Imogen Towler, Scott T Kay and Edoardo AltamuraMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 520 (4) 5845 (2023)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad453
Chandra follow-up of the Hectospec Cluster Survey: Comparison of caustic and hydrostatic masses and constraints on the hydrostatic bias
Crispin H. A. Logan, Ben J. Maughan, Antonaldo Diaferio, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 665 A124 (2022)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202243347
The eROSITA Final Equatorial-Depth Survey (eFEDS)
M. E. Ramos-Ceja, M. Oguri, S. Miyazaki, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 661 A14 (2022)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202142214
Characterizing hydrostatic mass bias with mock-X
David J Barnes, Mark Vogelsberger, Francesca A Pearce, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 506 (2) 2533 (2021)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab1276
Hydrostatic mass estimates of massive galaxy clusters: a study with varying hydrodynamics flavours and non-thermal pressure support
Francesca A Pearce, Scott T Kay, David J Barnes, Richard G Bower and Matthieu SchallerMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 491 (2) 1622 (2020)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz3003
Comparing different mass estimators for a large subsample of the Planck-ESZ clusters
L. Lovisari, S. Ettori, M. Sereno, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 644 A78 (2020)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202038718
Validation of selection function, sample contamination and mass calibration in galaxy cluster samples
S Grandis, M Klein, J J Mohr, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 498 (1) 771 (2020)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/staa2333
Weak lensing reveals a tight connection between dark matter halo mass and the distribution of stellar mass in massive galaxies
Song Huang, Alexie Leauthaud, Andrew Hearin, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 492 (3) 3685 (2020)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz3314
Weak-lensing analysis of SPT-selected galaxy clusters using Dark Energy Survey Science Verification data
C Stern, J P Dietrich, S Bocquet, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 485 (1) 69 (2019)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz234
The redshift evolution of X-ray and Sunyaev–Zel’dovich scaling relations in the fable simulations
Nicholas A Henden, Ewald Puchwein and Debora SijackiMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 489 (2) 2439 (2019)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stz2301
The FABLE simulations: a feedback model for galaxies, groups, and clusters
Nicholas A Henden, Ewald Puchwein, Sijing Shen and Debora SijackiMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 479 (4) 5385 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty1780
Weak lensing calibration of mass bias in the REFLEX+BCS X-ray galaxy cluster catalogue
Melanie Simet, Nicholas Battaglia, Rachel Mandelbaum and Uroš SeljakMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 466 (3) 3663 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw3322
HICOSMO – cosmology with a complete sample of galaxy clusters – I. Data analysis, sample selection and luminosity–mass scaling relation
G. Schellenberger and T. H. ReiprichMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 469 (3) 3738 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1022
X-Ray Morphological Analysis of the Planck ESZ Clusters
Lorenzo Lovisari, William R. Forman, Christine Jones, Stefano Ettori, Felipe Andrade-Santos, Monique Arnaud, Jessica Démoclès, Gabriel W. Pratt, Scott Randall and Ralph KraftThe Astrophysical Journal 846 (1) 51 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa855f
Next Generation Virgo Cluster Survey. XXI. The Weak Lensing Masses of the CFHTLS and NGVS RedGOLD Galaxy Clusters and Calibration of the Optical Richness
Carolina Parroni, Simona Mei, Thomas Erben, Ludovic Van Waerbeke, Anand Raichoor, Jes Ford, Rossella Licitra, Massimo Meneghetti, Hendrik Hildebrandt, Lance Miller, Patrick Côté, Giovanni Covone, Jean-Charles Cuillandre, Pierre-Alain Duc, Laura Ferrarese, Stephen D. J. Gwyn and Thomas H. PuziaThe Astrophysical Journal 848 (2) 114 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa8b6c
Abell 315: reconciling cluster mass estimates from kinematics, X-ray, and lensing
A. Biviano, P. Popesso, J. P. Dietrich, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 602 A20 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201629471
HIFLUGCS: X-ray luminosity-dynamical mass relation and its implications for mass calibrations with the SPIDERS and 4MOST surveys
Yu-Ying Zhang, Thomas H. Reiprich, Peter Schneider, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 599 A138 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201628971
Comparison of hydrostatic and dynamical masses of distant X-ray luminous galaxy clusters
G. Foëx, H. Böhringer and G. ChonAstronomy & Astrophysics 606 A122 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201731104
Gas distribution and clumpiness in the galaxy group NGC 2563
Andrea Morandi, Ming Sun, John Mulchaey, Daisuke Nagai and Massimiliano BonamenteMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 469 (2) 2423 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx1031
Galaxy cluster's rotation
M. Manolopoulou and M. PlionisMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 465 (3) 2616 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw2870
The impact of baryons on massive galaxy clusters: halo structure and cluster mass estimates
Monique A. Henson, David J. Barnes, Scott T. Kay, Ian G. McCarthy and Joop SchayeMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 465 (3) 3361 (2017)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw2899
Weak lensing study of 16 DAFT/FADA clusters: Substructures and filaments
Nicolas Martinet, Douglas Clowe, Florence Durret, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 590 A69 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201526444
Planck2015 results
N. Aghanim, M. Arnaud, M. Ashdown, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 594 A22 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201525826
Cosmology and astrophysics from relaxed galaxy clusters – IV. Robustly calibrating hydrostatic masses with weak lensing
D. E. Applegate, A. Mantz, S. W. Allen, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 457 (2) 1522 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw005
Herschel protocluster survey: a search for dusty star-forming galaxies in protoclusters atz= 2–3
Y. Kato, Y. Matsuda, Ian Smail, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 460 (4) 3861 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw1237
Hydrostatic and caustic mass profiles of galaxy clusters
Ben J. Maughan, Paul A. Giles, Kenneth J. Rines, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 461 (4) 4182 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw1610
Richness-based masses of rich and famous galaxy clusters
S. AndreonAstronomy & Astrophysics 587 A158 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201526852
Probing the diffuse baryon distribution with the lensing-tSZ cross-correlation
Yin-Zhe Ma, Ludovic Van Waerbeke, Gary Hinshaw, et al.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2015 (09) 046 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2015/09/046
XMM-NewtonandChandracross-calibration using HIFLUGCS galaxy clusters
G. Schellenberger, T. H. Reiprich, L. Lovisari, J. Nevalainen and L. DavidAstronomy & Astrophysics 575 A30 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201424085
CFHTLenS: weak lensing calibrated scaling relations for low-mass clusters of galaxies
K. Kettula, S. Giodini, E. van Uitert, et al.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 451 (2) 1460 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv923
Scaling properties of a complete X-ray selected galaxy group sample
L. Lovisari, T. H. Reiprich and G. SchellenbergerAstronomy & Astrophysics 573 A118 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201423954
Analytical model for non-thermal pressure in galaxy clusters – II. Comparison with cosmological hydrodynamics simulation
Xun Shi, Eiichiro Komatsu, Kaylea Nelson and Daisuke NagaiMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 448 (1) 1020 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv036
LoCuSS: Testing hydrostatic equilibrium in galaxy clusters
G. P. Smith, P. Mazzotta, N. Okabe, F. Ziparo, S. L. Mulroy, A. Babul, A. Finoguenov, I. G. McCarthy, M. Lieu, Y. M. Bahé, H. Bourdin, A. E. Evrard, T. Futamase, C. P. Haines, M. Jauzac, D. P. Marrone, R. Martino, P. E. May, J. E. Taylor and K. UmetsuMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters 456 (1) L74 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnrasl/slv175
Reconciling Planck cluster counts and cosmology? Chandra/XMM instrumental calibration and hydrostatic mass bias
Holger Israel, Gerrit Schellenberger, Jukka Nevalainen, Richard Massey and Thomas H. ReiprichMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 448 (1) 814 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv038
CHANDRADEEP OBSERVATION OF XDCP J0044.0-2033, A MASSIVE GALAXY CLUSTER ATz> 1.5
P. Tozzi, J. S. Santos, M. J. Jee, et al.The Astrophysical Journal 799 (1) 93 (2015)
https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/799/1/93
The important role of evolution in thePlanck YSZ-mass calibration
S. AndreonAstronomy & Astrophysics 570 L10 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201424387
Where the world stands still: turnaround as a strong test of ΛCDM cosmology
V. Pavlidou and T.N. TomarasJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2014 (09) 020 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2014/09/020
TEMPERATURE STRUCTURE OF THE INTRACLUSTER MEDIUM FROM SMOOTHED-PARTICLE HYDRODYNAMICS AND ADAPTIVE-MESH REFINEMENT SIMULATIONS
Elena Rasia, Erwin T. Lau, Stefano Borgani, et al.The Astrophysical Journal 791 (2) 96 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/791/2/96
The insignificant evolution of the richness-mass relation of galaxy clusters
S. Andreon and P. CongdonAstronomy & Astrophysics 568 A23 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201423616
A model for multiproperty galaxy cluster statistics
A. E. Evrard, P. Arnault, D. Huterer and A. FarahiMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 441 (4) 3562 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stu784
The X-CLASS−redMaPPer galaxy cluster comparison
T. Sadibekova, M. Pierrre, N. Clerc, et al.Astronomy & Astrophysics 571 A87 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201423794
Neutrino constraints: what large-scale structure and CMB data are telling us?
Matteo Costanzi, Barbara Sartoris, Matteo Viel and Stefano BorganiJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2014 (10) 081 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2014/10/081
CLASH-X: A COMPARISON OF LENSING AND X-RAY TECHNIQUES FOR MEASURING THE MASS PROFILES OF GALAXY CLUSTERS
Megan Donahue, G. Mark Voit, Andisheh Mahdavi, et al.The Astrophysical Journal 794 (2) 136 (2014)
https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/136