Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 54 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 50 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 18 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 31 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 105 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 182 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 466 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 40 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Cosmological constraints from the Planck cluster catalogue with DES shear profiles and Chandra observations (2509.02068v1)

Published 2 Sep 2025 in astro-ph.CO

Abstract: We present cosmological constraints from the Planck PSZ2 cosmological cluster sample, using weak-lensing shear profiles from Dark Energy Survey (DES) data and X-ray observations from the Chandra telescope for the mass calibration. We compute hydrostatic mass estimates for all clusters in the PSZ2 sample with a scaling relation between their Sunyaev-Zeldovich signal and X-ray derived hydrostatic mass, calibrated with the Chandra data. We introduce a method to correct these masses with a hydrostatic mass bias using shear profiles from wide-field galaxy surveys. We simultaneously fit the number counts of the PSZ2 sample and the mass calibration with the DES data, finding $\Omega_\text{m}=0.312{+0.018}_{-0.024}$, $\sigma_8=0.777\pm 0.024$, $S_8\equiv \sigma_8 \sqrt{\Omega_\text{m} / 0.3}=0.791{+0.023}_{-0.021}$, and $(1-b)=0.844{+0.055}_{-0.062}$ for our baseline analysis when combined with BAO data. When considering a hydrostatic mass bias evolving with mass, we find $\Omega_\text{m}=0.353{+0.025}_{-0.031}$, $\sigma_8=0.751\pm 0.023$, and $S_8=0.814{+0.019}_{-0.020}$. We verify the robustness of our results by exploring a variety of analysis settings, with a particular focus on the definition of the halo centre used for the extraction of shear profiles. We compare our results with a number of other analyses, in particular two recent analyses of cluster samples obtained from SPT and eROSITA data that share the same mass calibration data set. We find that our results are in overall agreement with most late-time probes, in very mild tension with CMB results (1.6$\sigma$), and in significant tension with results from eROSITA clusters (2.9$\sigma$). We confirm that our mass calibration is consistent with the eROSITA analysis by comparing masses for clusters present in both Planck and eROSITA samples, eliminating it as a potential cause of tension.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com