1: \documentstyle[general_cite,psfig]{mn}
2:
3: \title[The L--T relation of high-z clusters]{The WARPS survey -- IV: The X-ray luminosity--temperature relation of
4: high redshift galaxy clusters}
5:
6: \author[B. W. Fairley et al.]
7: {B. W. Fairley$^{1,8}$, L. R. Jones$^1$, C. Scharf$^{2}$, H. Ebeling$^{3}$,
8: E. Perlman$^{2}$, \cr D. Horner$^{4,7}$, G. Wegner$^{5}$ and M. Malkan$^{6}$ \\
9: $^1$ School of Physics and Astronomy, University of
10: Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK\\
11: $^2$ Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, MD 21218,
12: USA\\
13: $^3$ Institute for Astronomy, 2680 Woodlawn Dr, Honolulu, HI
14: 96822, USA\\
15: $^4$ Laboratory for High Energy Astrophysics, Code 660,
16: NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA\\
17: $^5$ Dept. of Physics \& Astronomy, Dartmouth College, 6127
18: Wilder Lab., Hanover, NH 03755, USA\\
19: $^6$ Dept. of Astronomy, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA\\
20: $^7$ University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-2421, USA\\
21: $^8$ Email: bwf@star.sr.bham.ac.uk\\}
22: \date{Accepted .....................; Received .....................;
23: in original form .......................}
24:
25: \begin{document}
26:
27: \maketitle
28:
29: \begin{abstract}
30:
31: We present a measurement of the cluster X-ray luminosity-temperature
32: relation out to high redshift ($z \sim 0.8$). Combined $ROSAT$ PSPC spectra of 91
33: galaxy clusters detected in the Wide Angle $ROSAT$ Pointed Survey (WARPS)
34: are simultaneously fit in
35: redshift and luminosity bins. The resulting temperature and
36: luminosity measurements of these bins, which occupy a region of the high redshift L-T
37: relation not previously sampled, are compared to existing measurements at
38: low redshift in order to
39: constrain the evolution of the L-T relation. We find
40: a best fit to low redshift ($z<0.2$) cluster data, at $\rm T > 1 \, keV$, to be
41: $\rm L \propto T^{3.15\pm0.06}$. Our data are consistent with no evolution
42: in the normalisation of the L-T relation up to $z \sim 0.8$. Combining our
43: results with $ASCA$ measurements taken from the literature, we find
44: $\eta=0.19\pm0.38$ (for $\Omega_0=1$, with $1\sigma$ errors) where $\rm
45: L_{Bol} \propto {(1+\it z)}^{\eta} \rm T^{3.15}$, or $\eta=0.60\pm0.38$ for
46: $\Omega_0=0.3$. This lack of evolution is
47: considered in terms of the entropy-driven evolution of clusters. Further
48: implications for cosmological constraints are also discussed.
49:
50: \end{abstract}
51:
52: \begin{keywords}
53: galaxies: clusters: general -- methods: data analysis -- surveys --
54: X-rays: galaxies -- cosmology: observations
55: \end{keywords}
56:
57: \section{Introduction}
58:
59: Clusters of galaxies, as the largest virialised objects in the
60: Universe, allow us a unique insight into the formation and evolution of
61: mass clustering on cosmological time-scales. The X-ray emission from galaxy
62: clusters originates from hot ($\rm T \sim 10^{7-8}$ K) intra-cluster gas
63: which, in relaxed systems, is in hydrostatic equilibrium with the cluster's
64: total gravitational field. Since the temperature of the
65: gas is proportional to its mass, the observed correlation between X-ray
66: luminosities and temperatures implies a relationship between
67: cluster baryon mass and total mass. Thus, studying the evolution of the L--T
68: relation probes the interrelated evolution of these mass components.
69: One of the first attempts at modelling these properties assumed self-similar
70: evolution of both the gravitational potential and the baryonic intracluster
71: medium (ICM) at varying cosmological epochs (\pcite{kai86}).
72:
73: These self-similar predictions are in conflict with observational
74: evidence. The strong positive evolution of the
75: cluster X-ray luminosity function (XLF) originally predicted (assuming
76: realistic cosmological parameters) is in stark
77: contrast to the negative evolution reported by \scite{gio90} and
78: \scite{hen92} for X-ray luminous clusters. The prediction is also in
79: conflict with the results of more recent cluster
80: surveys which find no significant evolution, at
81: any luminosity, out to moderate redshift ($z \sim 0.3$, \pcite{ebe97};
82: \pcite{deg99}), and again no significant (or mild negative) evolution at
83: low and intermediate luminosities and high redshifts (\pcite{ros95};
84: \pcite{bur97}; \pcite{vik98a}; \pcite{jon98b}). To account for such
85: discrepancies, modifications were suggested to the
86: self-similar theory. \scite{kai91} and
87: \scite{evr91} modelled a 'pre-heated ICM', in which an initial injection of
88: energy broke the direct self-similar scaling by introducing an entropy floor
89: in cluster cores. It also brought theoretical predictions of cluster properties into
90: better agreement with observational constraints.
91:
92: Tests of gravitational self-similar scaling are thus
93: fundamental to the understanding of cluster evolution. One such test used
94: in this analysis is the study of the cluster X-ray luminosity--temperature
95: (L--T) relation, which was predicted by the original self-similar model to be
96: described by an $\rm L \propto T^2$ law. However, a relationship
97: closer to $\rm L \propto T^3$, has been found by several cluster surveys and
98: compilations (e.g. \pcite{edg91}; \pcite{dav93}; \pcite{whi97}), whilst
99: even further steepening of
100: the relation is required to agree with galaxy group measurements
101: (\pcite{pon96}; \pcite{hel00}). In addition to predicting the slope of the L--T relation, self-similar
102: theory also predicts significant evolution in the normalisation of this
103: relation at different redshifts. However, the evolution predicted is
104: reduced in low density cosmologies, or by significant entropy injection at
105: early epochs (e.g. \pcite{kai91}; \pcite{cen94}; \pcite{kay99}).
106:
107: Attempts at constraining evolution in the L--T relation, at redshifts above
108: $z \sim 0.1$, are complicated by the inherent difficulty of temperature
109: estimation from often poor signal-to-noise data. \scite{mus97}, using $ASCA$
110: data from a sample of 38 clusters at $z > 0.14$, found no significant
111: evolution out to $z \sim 0.3$. Prior to this work, the only attempt
112: at quantifying evolution of the L--T relation to $z \sim 0.3$ was that
113: of \scite{hen94}, whose results were also
114: consistent with no evolution. \scite{hen94} used low signal-to-noise
115: spectra of 67 clusters observed with the $Einstein$ observatory,
116: each individually spectrally fitted, and then averaged together in redshift
117: bins. Recently \scite{don99} have used $ASCA$ measurements of clusters drawn from the
118: $Einstein$ Medium Sensitivity Survey (EMSS, \pcite{gio90}; \pcite{hen92}) to extend the conclusion of no
119: evolution to $z > 0.5$.
120:
121: In this paper we present an L--T relation based on $ROSAT$ spectra of WARPS
122: clusters, in various redshift and
123: luminosity bins. Although this procedure is analogous to the one adopted by
124: \scite{hen94}, a more sophisticated simultaneous fitting method
125: is adopted here. We discuss the data
126: analysis techniques used to obtain temperature estimates from often low
127: signal-to-noise $ROSAT$ PSPC data, and present results from simulated
128: spectra to demonstrate their validity. In order to allow self-consistent
129: discussion of any
130: evolutionary effects in our relation, we compare our results
131: with a local L--T relation over a wide range of temperatures and
132: luminosities.
133:
134: \section{Sample selection}
135:
136: Traditional studies of galaxy clusters have relied
137: on optically selected cluster
138: samples. Whilst these surveys were often large, they suffered from biasing
139: caused by projection effects and erroneous identifications (\pcite{luc83};
140: \pcite{fre90}; \pcite{str91}). The recent trend, therefore, has been to
141: base large cluster surveys on X-ray
142: selection techniques. This takes advantage of the X-ray emission from
143: diffuse gas, trapped in a cluster's gravitational potential well,
144: representing direct evidence of a three-dimensionally bound system. Several
145: recent serendipitous cluster surveys have been compiled, all based
146: on archival $ROSAT$ PSPC data (e.g. \pcite{cas95}; \pcite{ros95};
147: \pcite{col97}; \pcite{vik98b}; \pcite{rom00}).
148:
149: The Wide Angle $ROSAT$ Pointed Survey (WARPS, \pcite{sch97}) is also based
150: on archival $ROSAT$ PSPC data. It is a serendipitous cluster survey which
151: uses a sophisticated source detection algorithm, {\small VTP} \normalsize (\pcite{ebe93}), capable of detecting arbitrarily shaped emission, down to
152: very low surface brightness levels. An extensive optical follow-up program then
153: spectroscopically confirms the concordance of galactic redshifts within
154: each candidate cluster (\pcite{jon98a}). When complete, the WARPS survey
155: will have generated a statistically complete, flux-limited catalogue
156: covering a solid angle of more than 73 $\rm deg^2$ and including
157: approximately 150 X-ray selected galaxy clusters.
158:
159: The sample used in this paper comprises 91 clusters identified in the WARPS
160: survey, with redshifts in the range from $z=0.11$ to $z=0.833$. The WARPS
161: survey is flux-limited at $\rm 6 \times
162: 10^{-14} \: erg \: s^{-1} \: cm^{-2}$ (0.5--2 keV) in total cluster flux and
163: is restricted to $ROSAT$ pointings
164: of more than 8-ks exposure at $\rm |b|>20\deg$. Only the most sensitive area
165: of the PSPC detector, at off-axis angles of $3<r<15$ arcmin, is used.
166: In addition to the archival
167: $ROSAT$ PSPC data, deep optical imaging of the clusters, optical spectroscopy of
168: all the brightest cluster galaxies (BCGs) and in some
169: cases $ROSAT$ HRI data are available (\pcite{jon98a}; \pcite{per00}).
170:
171: \section{Data reduction}
172:
173: \subsection{Spectral fitting}
174:
175: For this work, the archival $ROSAT$ PSPC data, containing the 91 WARPS
176: clusters selected, were initially reduced and analysed using the
177: Starlink {\small ASTERIX} \normalsize package (\pcite{all95}). The data were screened to minimize particle
178: background rates by restraining the Master Veto Rate housekeeping parameter to a
179: range of 0 to 170. The Aspect Error and Accepted Event Rate parameters were
180: also limited to ranges of 0 to 2 and 0 to 30 respectively. The observation
181: time thus removed was on average 5 per cent. The resulting cleaned data were then used to
182: produce binned spectral cubes, with one spectral and two spatial
183: dimensions, from $ROSAT$ channels 11 through 231, with
184: energy ranges of 0.114 to 2.295 keV
185:
186: Background subtraction for each field was achieved by creating a model background spectral
187: cube. Firstly an annulus was selected between 9 and
188: 15 arcmin off-axis. This area is included in the WARPS analysis and was
189: selected to minimize vignetting extrapolation errors in the background
190: model. The background cube was projected to an image and
191: searched for point sources using the {\small ASTERIX PSS} \normalsize algorithm. Removal of the
192: sources resulted in a new background model. This process was iteratively repeated until no more point
193: sources were detected. The point source free cube was then
194: further edited manually to eliminate any extended sources, such as cluster
195: emission. The background level of this cube was then extrapolated over all
196: off-axis angles, using the known energy-dependent vignetting behaviour of the detector, to
197: produce a final background model.
198:
199: After background subtraction, a spectrum of the cluster was obtained by
200: projecting a selected area of the spectral cube on to the energy axis, before correcting
201: for energy-dependent vignetting and exposure effects. The circular
202: extraction regions around the clusters had initial radii of 700 and 900
203: kpc, for $z<0.5$ and $z>0.5$ respectively (we assumed $\rm H_0=50 \:
204: km \: s^{-1} \: Mpc^{-1}$ and $q_0=0$). These radii were manually
205: re-selected, where required, to eliminate contamination from nearby
206: non-cluster sources.
207: A background spectrum from the same area of sky, obtained from the
208: source-free background model, was then associated with the cluster
209: spectrum to allow spectral fitting using the maximum-likelihood C-statistic
210: (\pcite{cas79}). The number of counts in the cluster spectra ranged from 25
211: to 1001 (0.11--2.3 keV) with a median value of $\sim 120$ counts. The
212: signal-to-noise ratios of the data varied dramatically, depending
213: primarily on background level, exposure time and extraction
214: radius. The average signal-to-noise level was $\sim 6.8$ in the
215: 0.1--2.3 keV band, but was significantly higher in the 0.5--2 keV band used
216: in the initial detection (\pcite{sch97}). Thus C-statistic
217: fitting was selected to avoid biases inherent in $\chi^2$ fitting for low
218: count-per-bin data (\pcite{nou89}).
219:
220: The spectral models fitted to the data were the \scite{ray77} and {\small MEKAL} \normalsize (\pcite{mew86};
221: \pcite{kaa92}) codes for an optically thin thermal plasma. The column density
222: was fixed at the Galactic value determined from radio measurements (\pcite{sta92}), and a
223: metallicity of 0.3 $\, Z_{\odot}$ was assumed. It was found that both codes gave very
224: good agreement; the results presented here are from the {\small MEKAL} \normalsize model.
225:
226: Due to the very low number of counts in many of the
227: individual cluster spectra, the spectral fits were often poorly
228: constrained, with several not converging. In addition fits to a number of
229: high redshift, low signal-to-noise spectra converged to low temperatures with
230: small errors (e.g. T=$1.3 \pm 0.1$ keV). This was of concern as, according to
231: the observed, low redshift, L--T relation, this implied luminosities too low
232: for these clusters to be detected above the flux-limit of the survey.
233:
234: There are two primary characteristics of the data which dominate the
235: accuracy and reliability of the cluster
236: temperature measurements, and cause the effect discussed in the previous
237: paragraph. Firstly, the signal-to-noise of the cluster
238: above the background, and secondly, the accuracy to which the background level
239: can be determined. To investigate possible
240: systematic biases caused by poor photon statistics and erroneous background
241: estimates, extensive simulations were
242: performed, using the {\small ASTERIX SSIM} \normalsize package. Fig.~\ref{fig:fithist1} shows
243: spectrally fitted temperatures from 100 datasets all simulated from a 5keV
244: {\small MEKAL} \normalsize model. Each cluster was simulated as excess emission on top of a PSPC background of
245: 800 counts (0.1--2.3 keV, in the extraction region).
246: This background is brighter than any found in the actual observations;
247: hence the background level can be accurately determined in these
248: simulations. The total number of counts is varied according to Poisson
249: statistics. Spectral fits were performed on the emission after the
250: background was subtracted. It can be seen from the histogram that for the
251: spectra (in
252: this case with an average of $\sim 190$ counts in the 0.1--2.3 keV band,
253: giving a signal-to-noise of 6.0), three distinct temperature populations were
254: found. Spectral fits that were poorly constrained had the best-fitting temperatures pegged
255: at a maximum value (17 keV in this case). For a different subset of spectra
256: the fit essentially recovered the simulated temperature. However, a third
257: population of low temperature fits with small errors was also found, as
258: observed with some of the $ROSAT$ datasets. This is a demonstration of the
259: bias introduced with low signal-to-noise in the cluster spectra, but with
260: the background level reasonably well determined.
261:
262: The combination of the biases due to low signal-to-noise and poor
263: background statistics, is demonstrated in
264: Fig.~\ref{fig:fithist2}, which shows the results from 200
265: simulated spectra, each containing $\sim 120$ counts (0.1--2.3 keV). The
266: background level in this simulation was
267: tailored to give a signal-to-noise values around 7 (i.e. to have $\sim175$
268: counts, 0.1--2.3 keV). Here the individual fits
269: cannot recover the simulated temperature of 5 keV.
270:
271: A method of increasing the signal-to-noise of the spectra was thus required
272: to enable accurate temperature estimates to be made. This was achieved via
273: simultaneous multiple fitting of data sets in binned groups.
274:
275: \subsection{Multiple fitting}
276:
277: The effect of multiply fitting poor signal-to-noise datasets can be seen in
278: the inset panels in both Fig.~\ref{fig:fithist1} and
279: Fig.~\ref{fig:fithist2}. These show temperatures estimated from simultaneously
280: fitting subsets of five of the simulated datasets discussed in the previous
281: section. In most cases, values around the simulated temperature of 5 keV
282: were found by these fits.
283:
284: \begin{figure*}
285: \begin{minipage}{14cm}
286: \psfig{file=fig1.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
287: \caption{\label{fig:fithist1}Spectrally fitted temperature estimates for 100 simulated 5 keV
288: clusters with $\sim 190$ PSPC counts (0.1--2.3 keV). Note the three
289: distinct populations at low temperatures, $\sim5$ keV and pegged at 17
290: keV. Inset is the recovered temperature distribution after multiple
291: fitting of sets of 5 such clusters.}
292: \end{minipage}
293: \end{figure*}
294:
295: \begin{figure*}
296: \begin{minipage}{14cm}
297: \psfig{file=fig2.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
298: \caption{\label{fig:fithist2}Spectrally fitted temperature estimates for 200 simulated 5 keV
299: clusters with under $\sim 120$ PSPC counts (0.1--2.3 keV). The individual
300: spectral fits cannot recover the simulated temperature. Inset is the
301: recovered temperature distribution after multiple fitting of sets of 5
302: such clusters.}
303: \end{minipage}
304: \end{figure*}
305:
306: As can be seen from Fig.~\ref{fig:fithist2}, the primary effect of
307: reducing the cluster count level, together with incorporating a low
308: statistical accuracy background measurement, is to produce a number of simultaneous
309: fits that are not constrained and yield the maximum allowed temperature of
310: 17 keV. As the simulated signal-to-noise level is
311: similar to the poorer PSPC spectra used in this work, we might
312: expect to see this effect when using this method on WARPS clusters. No such
313: trend was observed though. This was probably because in the real
314: measurements a large background area was sampled in order to derive an
315: accurate background level. This is in contrast to the simulations, where a
316: much noisier background measurement resulted from using an area $\sim100$
317: times smaller (as required by the {\small SSIM} \normalsize program). This
318: difference also accounts for the increased accuracy of the
319: simulations with higher backgrounds, but similar signal-to-noise. In the
320: analysis of PSPC data, the large area used in the estimation of the individual background level
321: for each cluster serves to minimize the second of the two biases discussed
322: in the previous section.
323:
324: Numerous simulations were carried out to test the effectiveness of the
325: method. Gaussian distributions in both
326: temperature (e.g. $\rm \pm1 keV$ at 90 per cent confidence) and metallicity
327: ($\pm0.1 \, Z_{\odot}$), around the simulated values, were included.
328: These extended simulations also recovered a correct
329: temperature distribution, though with a larger spread spanning around
330: $\rm \pm2keV$. The temperature errors obtained from the fits, however,
331: generally encompassed the distribution range.
332:
333: From all the simulations, we conclude that multiple fits of five spectra,
334: with each individual spectra containing 100--200 counts (i.e. a
335: signal-to-noise ratio of 6--7 for PSPC spectra), with one free parameter,
336: and the background statistically well determined,
337: produce temperatures in which the level of any systematic bias is smaller
338: than the random error. There may be an additional temperature uncertainty
339: at high temperatures due to PSPC calibration uncertainties. \scite{mar97}
340: found evidence of significant differences between PSPC and $ASCA$ temperatures for
341: T $\sim5$ keV and higher, although the size of the differences are around the same
342: size as our statistical error.
343:
344: Multiple fitting then, was the method adopted for analysis of the PSPC spectra. In order to
345: produce averaged spectra, we binned the clusters into redshift
346: and luminosity bins. Where possible at least five clusters were included in
347: each bin. Simultaneous multiple fitting was done within Version 10.0 of the {\small
348: XSPEC} \normalsize fitting package (\pcite{arn96}) in
349: the {\small XANADU} \normalsize X-ray software suite. This enables several sets of data to be
350: fitted to the same model, with certain parameters either frozen or tied to
351: be the same for all datasets. In our case, the clusters were fitted to the
352: same temperature in the plasma code, but with individually varying
353: normalisations. Again, column densities were fixed at Galactic
354: values for each cluster and metallicities were fixed at 0.3 $\, Z_{\odot}$.
355:
356: The main complication arose from the need to use maximum likelihood
357: statistics. To correctly fit using the Cash statistic, {\small XSPEC} \normalsize requires a non-background
358: subtracted cluster spectrum, with a pre-fitted background component. Thus
359: multiple fitting first involved individually fitting the relevant
360: background for each cluster. The model used was an absorbed combination of
361: a {\small MEKAL} \normalsize plasma, a power law and a Gaussian emission line profile, with an initial
362: energy of 0.54 keV (as used by \scite{bra94} to model the X-ray background
363: spectrum).
364:
365: \subsection{Luminosities}
366:
367: Flux estimates in the 0.5--2 keV band were obtained for each cluster from the
368: individual fits to the spectra. These were then k-corrected, and corrected for low surface
369: brightness emission outside the selected area assuming a King profile with $\beta=\frac{2}{3}$ and
370: cluster core radius estimated from the {\small VTP} \normalsize data, as described by \scite{sch97}. The fluxes were then
371: converted to luminosities, using values of $\rm H_0=50 \: km \: s^{-1} \: Mpc^{-1}$
372: and $\rm q_0=0$. These luminosity estimates were then used for the binning of the clusters within each
373: redshift range.
374:
375: Due to the need for an accurate bolometric conversion from 0.5--2 keV luminosities,
376: which relies on temperature estimates, the bolometric luminosities of each
377: cluster used in
378: the final results were obtained after the multiple fit. Each cluster
379: was bolometrically corrected using the characteristic temperature of the
380: bin, before again being k-corrected and convolved through a King profile
381: correction to produce accurate luminosities. The typical bolometric
382: correction resulted in a factor of 2--3 increase from the 0.5--2 keV
383: luminosity. The cluster luminosities within the bin were then
384: averaged to provide a characteristic bin luminosity.
385:
386: The steep slope and large inherent scatter of the low redshift L--T relation
387: (e.g. \pcite{dav93}; \pcite{whi97}), heightens the importance of restricting the
388: range of luminosities within each luminosity bin. A large spread in
389: luminosities could result in large temperature differences in the clusters
390: contained within any bin. Which would then invalidate the simultaneous
391: fitting method employed. The flux-limited nature of the WARPS data meant
392: that a large spread in luminosities was found only when attempting to bin
393: together a number of the more luminous clusters within each redshift range. In
394: two cases, for instance, there was no other
395: cluster of similar luminosity to the most luminous
396: cluster, and so this cluster was individually fitted for
397: temperature. Both
398: WARPJ1416.4+2315 at $z=0.137$ and WARPJ1418.5+2510 at $z=0.294$ had more
399: than 800 counts in the 0.1--2.3 keV band, allowing a robust temperature
400: fit. This also had the effect of reducing the largest spread of
401: signal-to-noise ratios within any bin to less than a factor of two.
402:
403: \section{Results}
404:
405: \subsection{X-ray luminosity--temperature relations}
406:
407: Fig.~\ref{fig:lt} shows the L--T relation from binned PSPC spectra of
408: WARPS clusters. Different symbols
409: represent the redshift bins used. The luminosity errors are negligible in most
410: cases, and primarily due to temperature uncertainties affecting the
411: bolometric correction.
412:
413: \begin{figure*}
414: \begin{minipage}[c]{14cm}
415: \psfig{file=fig3.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
416: \caption{\label{fig:lt}The L--T relation from binned PSPC spectra of WARPS
417: clusters. Filled triangles represent clusters in the
418: $0.1<z<0.2$ bins. Filled squares represent $0.2<z<0.3$, circles $0.3<z<0.4$, stars
419: $0.4<z<0.5$, open triangles $0.5<z<0.6$ and open squares clusters of
420: $z>0.6$. Each point is shown with $1\sigma$ temperature and luminosity
421: errors. Also shown is the best-fitting line to the data shown in figure 4 at
422: T$\: > 1$ keV, $\rm L \propto
423: T^{3.15}$ with its 90 per cent confidence normalisation errors.}
424: \end{minipage}
425: \end{figure*}
426:
427: To put this L--T relation in context, Fig.~\ref{fig:lowzlt} through
428: Fig.~\ref{fig:46upzlt} show the
429: WARPS data points superposed on cluster L--T measurements drawn from the
430: literature. Data are included from a number of different
431: sources, including \scite{dav93}, \scite{mus97} and recent
432: results from \scite{don99}. The \scite{don99} dataset includes cluster measurements from a
433: number of other works (\pcite{don96}; \pcite{hen97}; \pcite{hat97}; \pcite{don98}).
434: Data from a recent survey of 24 galaxy groups showing diffuse X-ray
435: emission (\pcite{hel00}), are also included.
436:
437: \begin{figure*}
438: \begin{minipage}[c]{14cm}
439: \psfig{file=fig4.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
440: \caption{\label{fig:lowzlt}L--T relation for $z<0.2$. Triangles represent groups from Helsdon
441: \& Ponman (2000),
442: filled squares are WARPS bins, open circles are clusters from Mushotzky \&
443: Scharf (1997) and open squares
444: are clusters from David et al. (1993). The line shown is the best-fitting line
445: to clusters with $\rm T>1 keV$, $\rm L \propto T^{3.15}$.}
446: \end{minipage}
447: \end{figure*}
448:
449: \begin{figure*}
450: \begin{minipage}[c]{14cm}
451: \psfig{file=fig5.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
452: \caption{\label{fig:24zlt}L--T relation for $0.2<z<0.4$. Filled squares represent WARPS
453: bins, open circles are clusters from Mushotzky \&
454: Scharf (1997). The line shown is
455: the best-fitting line from the $z<0.2$ sample.}
456: \end{minipage}
457: \end{figure*}
458:
459: \begin{figure*}
460: \begin{minipage}[c]{14cm}
461: \psfig{file=fig6.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
462: \caption{\label{fig:46upzlt}L--T relation for $0.4<z<0.6$ and $z>0.6$. Squares represent WARPS
463: bins, circles are clusters from Mushotzky \&
464: Scharf (1997) and recent results from Donahue et al. (1999). In both cases
465: solid points represent datapoints from the $0.4<z<0.6$ range, and open
466: points $z>0.6$. The line shown is
467: the best-fitting line from the $z<0.2$ sample.}
468: \end{minipage}
469: \end{figure*}
470:
471: To enable us to discuss any possible evolution within the WARPS L--T relation,
472: it is important to have a suitable low redshift relation to compare to.
473: \scite{mus97} have found no evolution in the L--T relation out to $z
474: \sim 0.3$. So we include all clusters at $z<0.2$ in our low
475: redshift sample (Fig.~\ref{fig:lowzlt}). The WARPS points are in good agreement
476: with previous measurements and help fill the gap in the L--T observations at
477: T=1--3 keV.
478:
479: In order to define a fiducial low-redshift L--T relation, we obtained the
480: best-fitting power law to the data in Fig.~\ref{fig:lowzlt} at $\rm T>1 \:
481: keV$. Below T=1 keV, there may be a systematic trend towards lower
482: luminosities, away from the best-fitting line obtained at higher temperatures
483: (\pcite{pon96}; \pcite{hel00}). To allow for the systematic error
484: intrinsic to the use of datasets from three different X-ray observatories
485: and measured over different energy ranges, a minimum error of 5 per cent was
486: assigned to each cluster temperature where the existing
487: error was not already greater than this value. The best fitting slope was
488: then found using $\chi^2$ minimisation on the temperature axis.
489: For $\rm L_{Bol}=CT^{\alpha}$, we find $\alpha = 3.15 \pm 0.06$ and $\rm C = 6.04
490: \pm 1.47 \times 10^{42} erg s^{-1}$ (90 per cent confidence regions). Most
491: previous cluster L--T relations had a best-fitting slope of around $\rm L
492: \propto T^{2.8 \pm 0.2}$ (e.g. \pcite{mus97}, \pcite{dav93}). Our result
493: has a slightly steeper
494: slope primarily due to the inclusion of less luminous clusters not
495: analysed in previous investigations.
496:
497: \subsection{Measuring evolution}
498:
499: For the purposes of constraining evolution in the normalisation of the
500: WARPS L--T relation we assume a fixed slope of $\alpha = 3.15$ (section
501: 4.1). We then further parametrize the L--T relation as $\rm L_{Bol} = C
502: {(1+\it z)}^{\eta} \rm T^{\alpha}$ where $\rm C = 6.04 \times 10^{42}
503: erg s^{-1}$, the best-fitting normalisation of the local L--T relation. The $\eta$
504: term then parametrizes evolution at any redshift $z$.
505:
506: We now consider the WARPS measurements in the redshift ranges shown in
507: Fig.~\ref{fig:24zlt} and Fig.~\ref{fig:46upzlt}. Assuming the best-fitting
508: slope from the low redshift clusters, we again fit for normalisation by
509: minimising the $\chi^2$-statistic. Again only measurements above 1 keV were
510: included in the fit. Taking the central redshift of these bins
511: allows us to evaluate $\eta$ and its associated error. Most theoretical
512: studies discuss evolution in the L--T relation
513: in terms of an $\Omega_0=1$ cosmology. Table~\ref{tab:etaclose} displays our
514: evolutionary constraints ($\eta$ values) found for the three $z>0.2$
515: redshift ranges assuming $\Omega_0=1$. Wherever a different cosmology is
516: specified, we corrected cluster luminosities accordingly (we assume $\rm H_0=50 \: km
517: \: s^{-1} \: Mpc^{-1}$ throughout).
518:
519: In order to further constrain evolution in the L--T plot, the number of data
520: points in each redshift bin must be increased. Using datasets from
521: \scite{mus97} and Donahue et al. (1999) in conjunction with the WARPS bins, we
522: were able to place tighter constraints on evolution in the L--T
523: plot. The data used are represented in Fig.s~\ref{fig:24zlt} and
524: \ref{fig:46upzlt}, and the resulting $\eta$ values are listed in Table~\ref{tab:etaclose}.
525:
526: \begin{table}
527: \begin{minipage}[c]{8cm}
528: \center{\caption{\label{tab:etaclose}$\eta$ values for WARPS bins and WARPS bins combined with Mushotzky \&
529: Scharf (1997) and Donahue at al. (1999) measurements, assuming an $\Omega_0=1$ cosmology. Errors shown are
530: $1\sigma$. A weighted average is also given.}}
531: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|} \hline
532: $z$ range & WARPS $\eta$ values & All data $\eta$ values \\ \hline
533: 0.2--0.4 & $0.82\pm1.01$ & $0.87\pm0.55$ \\
534: 0.4--0.6 & $2.64\pm1.12$ & $0.56\pm0.52$ \\
535: 0.6+ & $0.45\pm1.99$ & $-1.46\pm0.86$ \\ \hline
536: Average= & $1.42\pm0.83$ & $0.19\pm0.38$ \\ \hline
537: \end{tabular}
538: \end{minipage}
539: \end{table}
540:
541: It can be seen from Table~\ref{tab:etaclose} that in general the WARPS
542: measurements are consistent with no evolution of the normalisation of the
543: L--T relation (though one redshift range provides marginal evidence for
544: evolution). When the
545: WARPS points are combined with other existing cluster measurements the
546: results are also consistent with no evolution. To quantify the level of
547: evolution measured we give the averaged $\eta$ value of the three separate
548: redshift range measurements. The averages have been
549: weighted by the inverse errors. The
550: averaged $\eta$ value of the combined dataset for $\Omega_0=1$
551: ($\eta=0.19\pm0.38$), is consistent with no evolution to $z
552: \sim 0.8$. Changing the cosmology used in the fit to an open
553: $\Omega_0=0.3$, $\lambda_0=0$ Universe modifies the
554: conclusion only slightly, producing $\eta=0.60\pm0.38$, still consistent with no
555: evolution at around the $1.5 \sigma$ level.
556:
557: \section{Discussion}
558:
559: \subsection{Theoretical relations}
560:
561: The implications of the evolution parameter, $\eta$, can now be discussed
562: in terms of evolution of X-ray temperatures and luminosities in the L--T
563: relation. Here we focus primarily on comparisons with the entropy driven
564: evolution model of \scite{bow97} and its extension to various
565: cosmologies (\pcite{kay99}). In this model the evolution of the
566: X-ray properties of clusters is split into contributions from the
567: gravitational heating of the ICM and from purely gas related
568: processes, such as shock heating or radiative cooling.
569: Assuming a minimum entropy (or entropy floor) in cluster cores allows
570: deviations from the pure
571: self-similar scaling of the cluster ICM with the underlying dark matter
572: distribution (e.g. \pcite{kai91}; \pcite{evr91}). The entropy driven model
573: further allows the exploration of the regime between the purely self-similar
574: scaling predictions of \scite{kai86} and the effect of a pre-heated ICM.
575:
576: As discussed by \scite{bow97}, the heating and cooling of the ICM gas can be
577: described in terms of evolution of the core entropy, if we assume that the
578: slope of the primordial density
579: fluctuation power spectrum, $n$, controls the gravitational growth of
580: clusters. Parameterizing this evolution in the
581: form
582: $s_{\rm min} \, = \, s_{\rm min}(\it z=\rm 0) + \it c_v \, \epsilon \, \rm ln(1+\it z)$
583: describes the level of the entropy floor, $s_{\rm min}$, at any redshift,
584: $z$. The term $\epsilon$ thus describes how this entropy evolves ($c_v$ is
585: just the specific heat capacity of the gas at constant volume). A negative value
586: represents continual shock heating of the ICM during cluster collapse and $\epsilon>0$ describes a
587: cluster core dominated by radiative cooling, whilst $\epsilon=0$ is
588: the constant entropy model (e.g. \pcite{evr91}). It is then possible to
589: derive a functional form for the L--T relation, with evolution of its
590: normalisation parametrized in terms of $n$, and $\epsilon$. If we assume
591: the density profile parameter is equal to the canonical value of,
592: $\beta=2/3$, then both the \scite{bow97} and \scite{kay99} scaling relation
593: models give an L--T relation of the form $\rm L_{Bol} \propto
594: {(1+\it z)}^{-3\epsilon/4} T^{2.75}$. Although we find a slightly different
595: value of the slope of the L--T relation than this, due to the assumption of
596: weak self-similarity (section 2.4, \scite{bow97}), we are only concerned
597: with the evolution of normalisation of the relation. We therefore use a
598: fixed slope of $\rm L_{Bol} \propto T^{3.15}$ when dealing with these
599: scaling relations. The main effect of the difference in slope is to
600: introduce a slight degeneracy between $n$ and $\epsilon$ when calculating the
601: expected normalisation of the L--T relation (e.g. fig. 2, \pcite{bow97}).
602:
603: \begin{figure*}
604: \begin{minipage}[c]{14cm}
605: \psfig{file=fig7.eps,width=14cm,height=9cm,angle=270}
606: \caption{\label{fig:kayeps}The L--T relation data above $z=0.2$, with normalisation predictions
607: from Kay \& Bower (1999). WARPS points are shown as
608: solid squares and the combined data of Mushotzky \& Scharf (1997) and
609: Donahue et al. (1999) are displayed as open circles. The thick line represents
610: the low redshift best-fitting relation. Plotted on the graph are predictions of
611: the normalisation of the L--T relation assuming $\Omega_0=0.3$ and
612: $n=-1.6$. Lines are calculated for a redshift of $z=0.5$, assuming 5
613: different values of $\epsilon$. The dot-dashed line represents
614: $\epsilon=0$, the thin solid lines $\epsilon=1$ and $\epsilon=-1$, and
615: the dashed lines $\epsilon=3$ and $\epsilon=-3$. For illustrative
616: purposes the lines have been converted back to a $\rm q_0=0$ cosmology,
617: to match the datapoints displayed in Fig. 3 through Fig. 6.}
618: \end{minipage}
619: \end{figure*}
620:
621: We can use the scaling
622: relations to predict the evolution in normalisation of the L--T relation in
623: terms of $n$ and $\epsilon$. An example is shown in
624: Fig.~\ref{fig:kayeps}. Here we have
625: assumed a temperature scaling relation as in Equation 2.11 of
626: \scite{kay99}. Assuming an underlying cosmology
627: ($\Omega_0=0.3$, $\lambda_0=0$ in this case) and a value of the initial
628: power spectrum (here $n=-1.6$, in agreement with the measured APM galaxy power
629: spectrum, \pcite{tad98}), we can use the lack of observed evolution in the
630: L--T relation to constrain evolution in the cluster core entropy.
631: This evolution of the entropy floor is represented by the
632: expected normalisation of the L--T relation changing, with redshift, as a
633: function of the value of $\epsilon$, as shown in
634: Fig.~\ref{fig:kayeps}. Here the degeneracy with $n$ is introduced in
635: the calculation of Equation 2.11 of \scite{kay99} and also with the effect of a changing epoch
636: of cluster formation as in Equations 2.12 and 2.13.
637: The lack of observed evolution (as demonstrated by the value of the $\eta$
638: parameter being consistent with zero), implies almost no evolution
639: of cluster core entropy to $z \sim 0.8$ given the assumed cosmology and
640: value of $n$. Table~\ref{tab:epsilon} details our calculated $\epsilon$
641: values in both an open and closed cosmology, for three different $n$
642: values. Also tabulated are the corresponding values required for pure
643: self-similar scaling in an $\Omega_0=1$ cosmology (\pcite{kai86}), given by
644: $\epsilon_{\rm ss}=-\frac{(n+7)}{(n+3)}$, which is strongly ruled out.
645:
646: So far we have not attempted to place any cosmological constraints. To do this we
647: need to break the degeneracy that allows evolution in the X-ray properties
648: to be explained via either gravitational or gas-phase phenomena. This
649: requires the introduction of a second dataset. The XLF, for instance,
650: allows the values of $n$ and $\epsilon$ to be constrained in an almost
651: orthogonal manner to the L--T evolution constraints. This is demonstrated
652: in fig. 3 of \scite{kay99}. If the XLF is non-evolving to high
653: redshift, as several recent studies have found (\pcite{bur97}; \pcite{jon98b};
654: \pcite{ros98}; \pcite{ebe00}), then important
655: constraints can be placed on the underlying cosmology. Given that the value of
656: $\epsilon$ is more tightly constrained in this work than in
657: \scite{kay99}, any fluctuation spectrum of $n<-1.5$ requires a Universe with a
658: low value of $\Omega_0$ ($\Omega_0 < 0.5$). Correspondingly, values of $n
659: \sim -1$ are required to be consistent with the observed XLF and L--T relation
660: evolutionary constraints in an $\Omega_0=1$ universe. Allowing for the
661: possibility of some
662: negative evolution in the XLF at the highest luminosities, as some surveys find
663: (\pcite{hen92}, \pcite{vik98a}), may relax these constraints slightly,
664: although the evolution at these high luminosities is not observationally
665: well determined.
666:
667: \begin{table}
668: \begin{minipage}[c]{8cm}
669: \center{\caption{\label{tab:epsilon}Constraints on the entropy evolution of cluster cores, as
670: represented by the $\epsilon$ parameter. Values are listed for 3
671: different values of the primordial fluctuation power spectrum, $n$, and in two different
672: cosmologies. $\epsilon$ values predicted for pure self-similar scaling
673: (Kaiser 1986) are also given.}}
674: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline
675: & $\epsilon \pm0.51 (1\sigma)$& $\epsilon \pm0.51 (1\sigma)$
676: & $\epsilon$ (self-similar) \\
677: $n$ value & $\Omega_0=0.3 , \lambda_0=0$ & $\Omega_0=1$ & $\Omega_0=1$ \\ \hline
678: -1 & -0.76 & 0.28 & -3.00 \\
679: -1.6 & -0.55 & 0.74 & -3.86 \\
680: -2 & -0.26 & 1.35 & -5.00 \\ \hline
681: \end{tabular}
682: \end{minipage}
683: \end{table}
684:
685: \subsection{Cooling flows}
686:
687: The abundance of cooling flows within the WARPS cluster survey could have a
688: large effect on the estimated cluster luminosity--temperature
689: relation. \scite{all98} showed that when the most X-ray luminous clusters
690: were modelled isothermally,
691: non-cooling flow clusters had significantly higher temperatures
692: than cooling flow clusters. Furthermore, they found a significant change
693: in the best-fitting slope of the cluster L--T relation when cooling flow
694: clusters were analysed with an isothermal model, as opposed to a model
695: with a central cooling flow component. They claimed a change in slope from
696: $\rm L \propto T^3$ to approximately $\rm L \propto T^2$ when
697: cooling flows were taken into account.
698:
699: Due to the low signal-to-noise of the $ROSAT$ X-ray data used in this work,
700: fitting the data for a cooling flow component is not possible. However, we
701: were able to estimate the fraction of clusters in our sample that exhibit
702: evidence for a cooling flow. It has been shown that most clusters ($\ge 70$
703: per cent) have or can form cooling flows (e.g. \pcite{edg92};
704: \pcite{per98}), though the cooling flow size is proportional to the X-ray
705: luminosity. Some cooling flows also exhibit other
706: characteristics, most notably optical line emission from the BCGs. The
707: fraction of clusters in X-ray
708: flux limited surveys displaying these properties is around
709: 33 per cent (e.g. \pcite{edg92}; \pcite{don92}), though this fraction is highly
710: dependent on the quality of the optical
711: spectra. Less than this level of cooling flow activity in the
712: WARPS sample would be a good indication that our survey does not
713: over-sample cooling flows.
714:
715: The optical spectra obtained to measure galaxy redshifts allowed analysis of line emission in the BCG of each
716: cluster. In a preliminary analysis, H$\alpha$ or [OII]$\lambda3727$
717: emission lines were detected in 4 of the 26
718: BCG spectra analysed. This implies a fraction of 16 per cent cooling
719: flow clusters in our survey. This might be expected if the frequency of
720: cooling flows exhibiting optical emission lines increased in more X-ray
721: luminous systems.
722:
723: Cooling flows would produce a lower temperature estimate for the same
724: X-ray luminosity, thus they would, in effect, mimic evolution in the WARPS
725: results in the direction predicted for $\Omega_0=1$, assuming no core
726: entropy evolution (\pcite{bow97}). Removal of the effects of a fraction of the sample
727: containing cooling flows would hence favour lower values of $\Omega_0$,
728: strengthening our conclusion.
729:
730: \section{Conclusions}
731:
732: We have presented a cluster X-ray luminosity--temperature relation out to high
733: redshifts ($z \sim 0.8$), based on $ROSAT$ PSPC spectra of WARPS
734: clusters. Due to the low signal-to-noise of many of our $ROSAT$ PSPC
735: spectra, a multiple fitting technique was adopted in order to constrain
736: temperatures. The 91 clusters analysed were binned into redshift and
737: luminosity bins, and spectrally fit to a characteristic temperature.
738:
739: In order to analyse the evolution of the L--T relation, a large sample of
740: low redshift ($z<0.2$) clusters was compiled from the literature. The best-fitting
741: power law to the data at low redshift and at T$>$1 keV was found to be a power law of index $\rm L
742: \propto T^{3.15\pm0.06}$ (90 per cent confidence). This relation was then compared with the high
743: redshift measurements to constrain possible
744: evolution in the normalisation of the L--T relation.
745:
746: The binned $ROSAT$ measurements of WARPS clusters were consistent with no
747: evolution of the L--T relation to $z \sim 0.8$. When combined with previous cluster measurements from the
748: literature they agree with the no evolution result of \scite{don99}, but
749: give stronger constraints; $\eta=0.19\pm0.38$ for $\Omega_0=1$, or
750: $\eta=0.60\pm0.38$ for $\Omega_0=0.3$ where $\rm L_{Bol} \propto {(1+\it
751: z)}^{\eta} \rm T^{3.15}$. Using the entropy driven evolution model of
752: \scite{bow97} and \scite{kay99}, a
753: limit to the implied entropy evolution of cluster cores was found.
754: Whilst the level of entropy evolution is slightly dependent on the value of
755: the primordial density fluctuation spectrum, $n$, low amounts of evolution were
756: favoured. The pure self-similar scaling expectations of
757: \scite{kai86} were found to be strongly excluded.
758:
759: The lack of evolution in the WARPS L--T relation, in conjunction with other
760: recent results, such as a non-evolving XLF, implies either
761: an open cosmology ($\Omega_0<1$) or one closed by a cosmological
762: constant, assuming $n<-1$. The forthcoming X-ray missions Chandra and XMM
763: will allow more accurate temperature estimates of clusters, out to high
764: redshifts, which will greatly improve our understanding of the L--T relation
765: and its cosmological implications.
766:
767: \section{Acknowledgments}
768:
769: The authors would like to thank Megan Donahue and collaborators for advance
770: access to their cluster measurements. Thanks to Scott Kay for help with the
771: entropy evolution model. We thank the Birmingham galaxies and
772: cluster group for useful discussions and input.
773: The data used in this work have been obtained from the Leicester database
774: and archive service (LEDAS). Computing facilities provided by the STARLINK
775: project have been used in this work. BWF acknowledges the receipt of a
776: PPARC studentship and LRJ also acknowledges the support of PPARC. HE
777: acknowledges financial support from SAO contract SV4-64008 and NASA LTSA
778: grant NAG 5-8253.
779:
780: \bibliographystyle{mnras}
781: \bibliography{clusters}
782:
783: \end{document}
784: