text:
# The X-ray Size-Temperature Relation for Intermediate Redshift Galaxy Clusters

## 1. Introduction

Nearby galaxy clusters exhibit a tight correlation between X-ray isophotal size and emission weighted intracluster medium (ICM) temperature (Mohr & Evrard (1997); hereafter ME97). This correlation is evidence of regularity; it exists in an X-ray flux limited sample of 45 clusters (Edge et al. (1990)), where no attempt has been made to use the X-ray morphologies to exclude clusters showing signatures of recent, major mergers. The scatter around the X-ray size–temperature (ST) relation is approximately 15% in size, comparable to the scatter of elliptical and lenticular galaxies around their fundamental plane (Jørgensen, Franx & Kjærgaard (1996)). This small scatter in the galaxy cluster scaling relation is intriguing, because (1) there is overwhelming evidence that galaxy clusters are still accreting mass (e.g. Mohr et al. (1995); Buote & Tsai (1996)) and (2) elliptical galaxies are generally thought to be among the most regular objects in the universe.

ME97 use 48 N-body and hydrodynamical simulations of cluster formation in four different cosmological models to address this apparent contradiction between regularity and ongoing accretion in nearby clusters. Using simulations from both $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ cosmologies, they show that a tight ST relation is expected even in cosmogonies where there is significant cluster growth at the present epoch.

The high degree of regularity implied by the ST relation is surprising, because the well known correlation between X-ray luminosity and emission weighted mean temperature (the $`L_XT_X`$ relation) has very large scatter (David et al. (1993)). ME97 show that the same cluster ensemble which exhibits a 15% scatter in the ST relation exhibits a 52% scatter in $`L_X`$ around the $`L_XT_X`$ relation. This higher scatter in the $`L_XT_X`$ relation results from the sensitivity of the X-ray luminosity to the densest regions of the cluster– a sensitivity to the presence or absence of so-called cooling flows (Fabian et al. (1994)). This interpretation is supported by more recent work where cluster ensembles specially chosen to contain no cooling flow clusters conform to $`L_XT_X`$ relations with significantly reduced scatter of 25% (Arnaud & Evrard (1999)). Additionally, when central parts of cooling flow clusters are excluded, the scatter in the $`L_XT_X`$ relation decreases (Markevitch (1998)).

Finally, cluster regularity is also evident in the tight correlation between ICM mass and emission weighted temperature (the $`M_{ICM}T_X`$ relation). When measuring ICM mass within a limiting radius of $`r_{500}`$ (the radius where the enclosed overdensity is 500 times the critical density) the scatter in mass about the $`M_{ICM}T_X`$ relation is 17% (Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)). Observational studies of the ST relation followed by work on the $`L_XT_X`$ and $`M_{ICM}T_X`$ relations support a scenario where clusters exhibit regularity similar to that of elliptical galaxies in the properties measured on the scales of their virial regions, but exhibit significant irregularities in the properties of the densest, central regions where physical processes other than gravity and gas dynamics– such as radiative cooling and magnetic fields– play significant roles (Mohr & Evrard (1997); Arnaud & Evrard (1999); Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)). The evidence indicating cluster regularity is balanced by evidence for departures from regularity; the scatter in the observed scaling relations is larger than can be accounted for by the measurement uncertainties. This resolved scatter contains clues about, among other things, cluster peculiar velocities and departures from equilibrium.

Here we examine the ST relation at intermediate redshift ($`0.19z0.55`$) using ROSAT HRI observations of the Canadian Network for Observational Cosmology (CNOC; e.g. Yee et al. (1996); Lewis et al. (1999)) cluster sample. The ST relation provides a potentially powerful tool to study the expansion history of the universe. As explained in detail below, the ST relation is rather insensitive to cosmological evolution. Thus, armed with an accurate model of cluster evolution, one could use the ST relation to measure distances at intermediate redshift, constraining the deceleration parameter $`q_0`$.

We first present the X-ray ST relation in the nearby cluster sample ($`\mathrm{\S }`$2) and then present an interpretation of the ST relation in terms of regularity in the underlying dark matter properties of the cluster. Section 3 describes observations of the ST relation in intermediate redshift clusters. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.3 we use these observations to constrain cosmological parameters. Section 4 contains a summary of our conclusions. Throughout the paper we use $`H_0=50h_{50}\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Mpc}`$.

## 2. Local X-ray ST Relation

Below we present observations of the ST relation in an X-ray flux limited sample of clusters and then discuss cluster scaling relations.

### 2.1. Observations

Fig 1 contains a plot of the X-ray ST relation for an ensemble of nearby galaxy clusters (see ME97 for cluster list). This sample is essentially a low redshift sample, $`z_{median}z=0.055`$ with RMS variation $`\sigma _z=0.03`$, but the full redshift range is $`0.01z0.19`$. The cluster isophotal size $`R_I`$ is plotted versus the emission weighted mean ICM temperature $`T_X`$, where

$$R_I=\sqrt{A_I/\pi }$$
(1)
and $`A_I`$ is the area enclosed by the isophote $`I`$. The isophotal size is a model-independent measure extracted directly from the X-ray image. ICM temperatures come from the literature (listed in ME97). In this figure we use the galactic absorption corrected surface brightness $`I=3.0\times 10^{14}\mathrm{ergs}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{arcmin}^2`$ within the cluster rest frame 0.5-2.0 keV band. In the conversion from count rate to physical flux units we use PROS, assume a Raymond-Smith spectrum with the published mean temperature $`T_X`$ and $`\frac{1}{3}`$ cosmic abundances (Mushotzky & Loewenstein (1997)). We convert between the angular size and physical size of the isophotal region using the angular diameter distance, and we also correct $`I`$ for cosmological dimming $`(1+z)^4`$.

The best fit power law to this local ST relation has the form

$$R_I=(0.71\pm 0.02)\left(\frac{T_X}{6\mathrm{keV}}\right)^{1.02\pm 0.11}h_{50}^1\mathrm{Mpc}$$
(2)
and the scatter about this relation is 15% in $`R_I`$. This fit is shown as a solid line in Fig 1. Because this is the local ST relation, it is only weakly dependent on the deceleration parameter. For this relation we have assumed the parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$; for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ the normalization is 1.8% lower, and for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ the normalization is 2.7% lower.

### 2.2. Cluster Scaling Relations

Galaxy cluster scaling relations between, for example, virial mass and temperature $`T`$ are expected if clusters are approximately virialized. The spherical collapse model predicts that newly collapsed objects will have mean densities which are $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ times the critical density $`\rho _{crit}=3H^2/8\pi G`$, where $`H`$ is the Hubble parameter and in an Einstein-de Sitter model $`\mathrm{\Delta }=18\pi ^2`$. Therefore, we define the virial radius $`r_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of an object with virial mass $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to be

$$r_\mathrm{\Delta }=\left(\frac{M_\mathrm{\Delta }}{\frac{4}{3}\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{crit}}\right)^{1/3}.$$
(3)
Newly collapsed clusters may also satisfy the virial relation

$$GM_\mathrm{\Delta }=aTr_\mathrm{\Delta }$$
(4)
where $`T`$ is the virial temperature and $`a`$ is a number dependent on the cluster density and temperature structure; in the case that cluster structure is self similar (i.e. that massive clusters are simply rescaled versions of low mass clusters) $`a`$ will be constant for all $`T`$ and Eqns 3 and 4 lead to the well known scaling relations between virial mass, radius and temperature

$$M_\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{\left(a^{}T\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{crit}}}\mathrm{and}r_\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{\left(a^{}T\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{crit}}},$$
(5)
where $`a^{}`$ is a dimensionless structure parameter like $`a`$. These scaling relations are expected to hold for a range of $`r_\delta `$ and $`M_\delta `$, where $`r_\delta `$ is the region with enclosed overdensity $`\delta `$ with respect to $`\rho _{crit}`$ and $`M_\delta `$ is the corresponding enclosed mass. Numerical cluster simulations indicate that the emission weighted mean ICM temperature $`T_X`$ is an adequate proxy for the virial temperature $`T`$, and that these scaling relations exist even in cluster populations which exhibit merging and substructure (Evrard, Metzler & Navarro (1996); Bryan & Norman (1998)). Using simulations to normalize these relations, one finds that clusters with $`T_X`$ of 10 keV have virial masses $`M_{200}=4\times 10^{15}h_{50}^1M_{}`$ and virial radii $`r_{200}=4h_{50}^1Mpc`$. The small scatter in the observed ST relation, the correlation between ICM mass and temperature (see Section 1), and a direct study of the correlation between binding mass (estimated using cluster galaxy kinematics) and emission weighted temperature (Horner, Mushotzky & Scharf (1999)) provide evidence that the conditions required for Eqn 5 to be valid are generally met in real galaxy clusters.

### 2.3. X-ray ST Relation

The X-ray surface brightness (units: ergs s-1cm-2sr-1) at a projected radius $`R_\delta `$ from the cluster center is

$$I(R_\delta )=\frac{1}{2\pi \left(1+z\right)^4}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑ln_e(r)n_H(r)\mathrm{\Lambda }(T)$$
(6)
where $`n_e`$ and $`n_H`$ are the electron and proton number densities, $`r=\sqrt{R_\delta ^2+l^2}`$ is the distance from the cluster center and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(T)`$ is the X-ray emission coefficient which includes contributions from thermal bremsstrahlung and line emission (Raymond & Smith (1977)). We can express the ICM density $`\rho _g`$ in terms of the underlying dark matter density $`\rho _{dm}`$: $`\rho _g(r)=f_g\rho _{dm}(r)g(r)`$, where $`f_g`$ is the ICM mass fraction within the virial region and $`g(r)`$ is a function describing differences in the dark matter and ICM density distributions; then, using $`n_i=\rho _g/\mu _im_p`$, we can rewrite the X-ray surface brightness as

$$I(R_\delta )=\frac{f_g^2\mathrm{\Lambda }(T_X)}{2\pi m_p^2\mu _e\mu _H\left(1+z\right)^4}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑l\rho _{dm}^2(r)g^2(r)$$
(7)
We bring the emission coefficient out of the integral and use the value at $`T=T_X`$; although this is only strictly valid for an isothermal gas, the temperature insensitivity of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(T)`$ band limited to 0.5:2.0 keV makes this an excellent approximation even in the presence of departures from isothermality (e.g. Fabricant, Lecar & Gorenstein (1980); Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)).

Finally, we express the dark matter density profile in terms of the characteristic overdensity of the virial region: $`\rho _{dm}(r)=\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{crit}f_{dm}(r_\mathrm{\Delta }y)`$, where $`f_{dm}(y)`$ encodes the dependence of the dark matter profile on a dimensionless radius $`y=r/r_\mathrm{\Delta }`$; this approach is consistent with numerical cluster simulations, which indicate that cluster dark matter density profiles have a “universal” form (Navarro, Frenk & White (1997), hereafter NFW). More recently, higher resolution simulations have shown differences between the inner profile (at radii which are 1% of the virial radius) and the form proposed by NFW (Moore et al. (1999); Jing & Suto (1999)); these differences appear to be smallest for cluster scale haloes, and none of our conclusions are sensitive to the behavior of the density profile at 1% of the virial radius. Expressing $`\rho _{dm}`$ in this way, and removing the characteristic scale $`R_\delta `$ from the integral, the X-ray surface brightness becomes

$$I(R_\delta )=\frac{f_g^2\mathrm{\Lambda }(T)\rho _{crit}^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2R_\delta }{2\pi m_p^2\mu _e\mu _H\left(1+z\right)^4}\mathrm{\Theta }$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a dimensionless integral which encodes the shape of the ICM density profile: $`\mathrm{\Theta }=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\lambda f_{dm}^2(\eta )g^2(\eta )`$, where $`\eta =\sqrt{1+\lambda ^2}`$ and $`\lambda ^2=\left(r/R_\delta \right)^21`$.

We relate $`R_\delta `$ and $`R_I`$ using the shape of the typical X-ray surface brightness profile; $`I(R)`$ is typically well fit by the so-called $`\beta `$ model (Cavaliere & Fusco-Femiano (1978))

$$I(R)=I_0\left(1+\left(\frac{R}{R_c}\right)^2\right)^{3\beta +1/2}$$
(9)
where $`R_c`$ is the core radius; well outside the core the surface brightness falls as $`I(R)R^{16\beta }`$. Therefore we write

$$R_I=R_\delta \left(\frac{I(R_\delta )}{I}\right)^{1/(6\beta 1)}.$$
(10)
Using Eqn. 5 to substitute $`T_X`$ for $`R_\delta `$, one can readily determine the ST relation at a particular redshift in the case that cluster structure is self similar

$$R_IT_X^\alpha \mathrm{where}\alpha =\frac{3\beta }{6\beta 1}$$
(11)
For $`\beta =2/3`$, a typical observed value (Jones & Forman (1984); Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)), the predicted ST relation has $`\alpha =2/3`$, shallower than the observed relation: $`\alpha =1.02\pm 0.11`$. The observed increase in ICM mass fraction $`f_g`$ with cluster temperature $`T_X`$ (Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)) is enough to explain the steepness of the observed relation. The physics underlying this systematic variation in cluster gas mass fraction is likely heating of the intergalactic medium during the process of galaxy formation. This so-called preheating affects the structure of the gas in low mass clusters more so than in high mass clusters (e.g. Metzler & Evrard (1994); Cavaliere, Menci & Tozzi (1998); Ponman, Cannon & Navarro (1999)). As discussed below, in comparing the local and intermediate redshift ST relations it is important only that the effects of this preheating be similar in both samples.

## 3. Intermediate Redshift X-ray ST Relation

Before presenting the intermediate redshift ST relation, we present an evolution model and our measurement methods.

### 3.1. Evolution of the ST Relation

Comparison of ST relations in nearby and distant populations requires a model for how the expected changes in cluster structure with increasing redshift will affect the ST relation. In the previous section we presented an explanation of the correlation between cluster X–ray isophotal size and emission weighted ICM temperature $`T_X`$ as a manifestation of underlying scaling relations in the dark matter properties of the cluster. Following this line of reasoning, we now express the evolution of the ST relation in terms of the redshift evolution of these same dark matter properties.

The evolution of the dark matter scaling relations is apparent in Eqn 5. The normalization of these scaling relations changes with redshift according to the change in $`\rho _{crit}`$ and the change in the characteristic overdensity $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of collapsed haloes. Within Einstein-de Sitter models $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ does not evolve, whereas evolution is expected in low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ models. For simplicity of presentation, in the following analysis we explicitly follow only changes in $`\rho _{crit}`$, but accounting for changes in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ would not affect our conclusions. Using $`H(z)=H_0E(z)`$, we express the evolution of the mass and size scaling relations as

$$M_\mathrm{\Delta }(T,z)=\frac{M_\mathrm{\Delta }(T,0)}{E(z)}\mathrm{and}R_\mathrm{\Delta }(T,z)=\frac{R_\mathrm{\Delta }(T,0)}{E(z)}$$
(12)
where $`E^2(z)=\mathrm{\Omega }_M(1+z)^3+(1\mathrm{\Omega }_M\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })(1+z)^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are the present epoch contributions to the density parameter from matter and “dark energy”, respectively. These simple evolution models are valid only for self similar evolution– i.e. in the case that distant cluster dark matter profiles are structurally similar to those of nearby clusters.

From Eqn 8 it follows that the X-ray surface brightness at $`R_\delta `$ evolves as $`I(R_\delta )E^3(z)`$ and that the normalization of the ST relation evolves as

$$R_I(T,z)=R_I(T,0)E^\eta (z)\mathrm{where}\eta =\frac{46\beta }{6\beta 1}$$
(13)
Interestingly, for the most common cluster profile $`\beta =2/3`$ (local: Jones & Forman (1984); Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999); this intermediate redshift sample: $`\beta =0.63\pm 0.04`$), so $`\eta =0`$, corresponding to no evolution in the ST relation. In essence, a cluster of a given $`T_X`$ is denser in the past, boosting its X-ray surface brightness and tending to increase the isophotal radius $`R_I`$, but this cluster is also smaller in the past, tending to decrease the isophotal radius $`R_I`$. If the ICM density profile behaves as $`\rho _gr^2`$, these two effects cancel. Thus, a population of clusters with measured $`\beta 2/3`$ will exhibit an ST relation which is relatively insensitive to cosmological evolution. In principle, this behavior makes the ST relation ideal for measuring angular diameter distances to high redshift clusters.

### 3.2. Observations

We use archival ROSAT HRI observations of 11 of the 14 CNOC clusters discussed in Lewis et al. (1999); these 11 clusters are those with published $`T_X`$ measurements. A detailed description of the reduction to 0.5′′ pixel images is given in Lewis et al. (1999). The HRI angular resolution is $`5^{\prime \prime }`$ FWHM; we further bin these images to a final pixel size of 2′′ without significant loss of angular resolution. Despite the far higher median exposure time (33 ks compared to 8 ks), the image quality of these intermediate redshift clusters is far lower than for our nearby sample (due to combination of lower observer frame surface brightness and higher instrument background). The image quality is too poor to allow isophotal sizes measurements directly from the images using the approach described in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2; therefore, we fit circular $`\beta `$ models (same form as Eqn 9 with $`\theta `$ substituted for $`R`$) to these images using the software developed for measuring SZE+X-ray distances (Reese et al. (2000)). Essentially, we find the set of parameters $`I_0`$, $`\theta _c`$, $`\beta `$, cluster centroid $`(\alpha ,\delta )`$ and local background $`I_{bkg}`$ which maximizes the likelihood of consistency between model and data. In all these fits we fix the background to the value measured in an annulus extending from 4.5 to 5, a background dominated region with an essentially negligible contribution from the cluster. Fits are performed to the central portion ($`\theta 4.2^{}`$) of the image which includes the cluster and a local background region. In Table 1 we list the best fit parameters with estimates of the statistical uncertainties. The central surface brightness and measured background are both given in detector units of cts s-1arcmin-2.

These cluster parameters are in reasonably good agreement with those presented in Lewis et al. (1999), with the exception of two clusters A2390 and MS1358. The different best fit parameters in these two clusters stem from the treatment of emission excesses; we fit the surface brightness model to the entire dataset, whereas Lewis et al. (1999) exclude the central region in both these clusters. This exclusion approach typically leads to larger core radii and correspondingly higher $`\beta `$’s than would fitting to the entire cluster as in our method.

An examination of the fit residuals in our sample provides no clear evidence for systematic differences between the data and the models with the exception of A2390, which exhibits an asymmetry or centroid variation (e.g. Mohr, Fabricant & Geller (1993)). Allowing for an ellipticity introduces two additional free parameters, and the information content of some of the images simply is not sufficient to provide meaningful constraints. Our goal here is to determine whether there is any evidence of regularity in intermediate redshift clusters; any mismatch between the data and the model (like that in A2390) will serve simply as an additional source of scatter in the final relation. Therefore, we conservatively present a uniform and objective analysis which is appropriate for the majority of our sample, rather than varying our analysis from cluster to cluster. (An elliptical $`\beta `$ model fit to A2390 yields an isophotal size which is 8% smaller than that listed in Table 1. This correction makes A2390 more consistent with the best fit ST relation, but the correction is unimportant compared to the 17% RMS scatter of the sample about that best fit relation.) Of course the best approach is a non-parametric analysis of the surface brightness maps such as that applied to the local sample, but this is not possible with the current data.

We use PROS to convert the detector count rate into galactic absorption corrected flux units of ergs s-1cm-2 within the cluster rest frame 0.5:2.0 keV band. As for the low redshift clusters, we assume a Raymond-Smith emission spectrum with the measured mean temperature $`T_X`$ and $`\frac{1}{3}`$ cosmic abundances (Mushotzky & Loewenstein (1997)) at the appropriate redshift, and then we correct for the $`(1+z)^4`$ cosmological dimming. The rest frame 0.5:2.0 keV central surface brightnesses in units of ergs s-1cm-2arcmin-1 are also listed for each cluster.

Angular isophotal sizes $`\theta _I`$ are then estimated using a fiducial surface brightness of $`3.0\times 10^{14}`$ ergs s-1cm-2arcmin-2. We determine statistical uncertainties in the fit parameters by exploring the likelihood within a grid in the parameters $`I_0`$, $`\theta _c`$ and $`\beta `$; we then use that range to estimate uncertainties in the derived isophotal size $`\theta _I`$. Figure 3.1 contains a plot of the 1, 2 and 3$`\sigma `$ confidence regions in $`\beta `$ and $`\theta _c`$ for MS1455; lines of constant isophotal size $`\theta _I`$ are overlaid. Note that lines of constant $`\theta _I`$ are approximately parallel to the well known $`\beta \theta _c`$ correlation (e.g. Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)), minimizing the detrimental effects this correlation has on our size measurement uncertainties.

Measured $`\theta _I`$ are then converted into physical isophotal sizes $`R_I`$ using the angular diameter distance $`d_A`$: $`R_I=\theta _Id_A`$. We use the general form

$`d_A={\displaystyle \frac{c}{H_0(1+z)}}{\displaystyle \frac{F\left(\kappa _0^z\frac{dz^{}}{E(z^{})}\right)}{\kappa }}`$
$`\kappa =\sqrt{\left|1\mathrm{\Omega }_M\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right|}`$ (14)
where $`F(x)=sinh(x)`$, $`x`$, and $`sin(x)`$ in an open, flat and closed cosmology. Table 1 contains a list of $`\theta _I`$ for $`I_x=3.0\times 10^{14}`$ ergs/s/cm2/arcmin2 with statistical uncertainty estimates and the corresponding $`R_I`$ for the case where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ & $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$.

Figure 3.1 contains the intermediate redshift ST relation with 1$`\sigma `$ error bars in both $`T_X`$ and $`R_I`$. The conversion from $`\theta _I`$ to $`R_I`$ assumes $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$ in this figure. The best fit relation in this case is

$$R_I=(0.67\pm 0.04)\left(\frac{T_X}{6\mathrm{keV}}\right)^{1.19\pm 0.21}h_{50}^1\mathrm{Mpc},$$
(15)
and the RMS scatter in size about this relation is 17%. Also plotted is the local ST relation for this same isophote (solid line). The uncertainties are derived by bootstrap resampling the list of 11 sizes (allowing duplication) and refitting the relation.

There is a suggestion that the intermediate redshift ST relation is steeper than the local relation, but the difference in slopes is less than 1$`\sigma `$ significant. In fact, both the zeropoints and slopes of the local and intermediate ST relations are statistically consistent when we use this particular set of cosmological parameters. With a larger sample it will be possible to measure the intermediate redshift ST relation slope more accurately; a comparison of the two slopes would be an important diagnostic of unusual structural evolution in clusters.

Figure 3.2 contains a plot of the intermediate redshift ST relation assuming $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$. The best fit slope in this case is $`1.16\pm 0.20`$, and the zeropoint is $`0.59\pm 0.034`$. This zeropoint differs from that of the local ST relation (also calculated with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$) at 2.5$`\sigma `$.

We have examined the local and intermediate redshift ST relations at four other isophotes: $`1.5\times 10^{14}`$ cgs, $`2.0\times 10^{14}`$ cgs, $`4.0\times 10^{14}`$ cgs, and $`5.0\times 10^{14}`$ cgs. The general conclusions reached above using the isophote $`3.0\times 10^{14}`$ cgs apply equally as well at these other isophotes: there is a suggestion that the ST relation at intermediate redshift is steeper (at less than 1 $`\sigma `$ significance) than the local relation, and the zeropoints are in good agreement when using the cosmological parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$. The fainter the isophote the larger the enclosed region. Pushing to fainter isophotes is dangerous given the quality of the intermediate redshift data, and pushing to brighter isophotes leads to complications from central emission excesses and the effects of the PSF. Thus, we choose the isophote $`3.0\times 10^{14}`$ cgs as a compromise between these two competing effects.

### 3.3. Cosmological Constraints

Although the X-ray images of these 11 clusters are poor, it is nevertheless interesting to use the local ST relation and our evolution model to predict distances to the intermediate redshift sample, thereby constraining cosmological parameters. Because the clusters are at a range of redshifts, both the scatter of the data about the local ST relation and any systematic offsets from the local relation contain cosmological information. Operationally, for each set of cosmological parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ we convert the measured $`\theta _IR_I`$ and calculate the $`\chi ^2`$ of the sample about the best fit local ST relation, where the best fit local relation is calculated using this same set of cosmological parameters. Fig 4 contains contours of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2`$ corresponding to 1, 2 and 3 $`\sigma `$ confidence regions (equivalent to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=2.3`$, 6.2 and 11.8) in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ space.

The current sample, because of observational uncertainties, does not provide a strong cosmological constraint. The 1$`\sigma `$ confidence region is a wide trough similar in character to those derived from luminosity distances to SNe Ia (Schmidt et al. (1998); Perlmutter et al. (1999)), with the important difference that our sample of 11 intermediate redshift distances is not as constraining as the larger samples of SNe Ia distances. Notably, there is enough power in the current dataset to exclude the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ & $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ model (one of three models marked with stars) at $`>`$95% confidence. If one considers only models where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$, then the preferred model has $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.09`$. Furthermore, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M<0.32`$ with 1$`\sigma `$ confidence and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M<1`$ with 3$`\sigma `$ confidence.

One can also use these data to constrain the deceleration parameter $`q_0\mathrm{\Omega }_M\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }/2`$. The preferred value is $`q_0=0.11_{0.65}^{+0.41}`$ (68% confidence).

Clearly, larger samples of archival data and the impending stream of high quality X-ray images from Chandra and XMM will provide tighter constraints. One particular concern in this study is that the local and intermediate redshift samples were observed with two different instruments: the ROSAT PSPC and the ROSAT HRI. Any relative calibration errors would then serve to bias the preferred cosmological parameters. However, the steepness of cluster X-ray surface brightness profiles mitigates this potential problem; typically, the surface brightness falls off as $`I\theta ^3`$, so even a 10% relative error in the calibration of the PSPC and HRI would introduce only a 3% error in the angular size of the cluster.

Although there has been no previous use of cluster scaling relations to constrain cosmological parameters, there have been three attempts to use the ICM mass fraction $`f_{ICM}`$ (Pen (1997); Cooray (1998); Rines et al (1999)); if one assumes $`f_{ICM}`$ is constant with redshift, then one can use its distance dependence to constrain the distance–redshift relation. The Pen constraint $`q_0=0.89\pm 0.29`$ is marginally inconsistent with our measurement, but the Pen analysis is only appropriate in the case that the ICM traces the dark matter, a case that is inconsistent with both theoretical and observational studies (David, Jones & Forman (1995); Evrard (1997)).

In the Rines et al. analysis, care is taken to (1) match the luminosity ranges of the local and intermediate redshift samples, (2) address the expected radial variation of $`f_{ICM}`$, and (3) test the consistency of the published effective areas of the two satellites involved (Einstein and ASCA). Because $`f_{ICM}`$ increases slowly with radius, it is important that it be measured within the same portion of the virial region in the local and intermediate redshift samples; this complicates the use of $`f_{ICM}`$ measurements as cosmological constraints. If one analyzes local and intermediate redshift clusters at a fixed metric aperture, the region studied will correspond to a larger fraction of the virial region as the redshift increases (see Eqn. 12). Similarly, when measuring $`f_{ICM}`$ within a fixed portion of the virial region $`r_{500}`$, it is important that the redshift evolution of the $`r_{500}T_x`$ be included; it appears that in both the Rines et al. and Cooray analyses, no evolution was included, so the portion of the virial region used in determining $`f_{ICM}`$ increases with redshift. In both cases, these biases cause the inferred angular diameter distances to be underestimated.

The size of the bias depends on the cosmological model being evaluated (Eqn. 12); using the relation $`f_{ICM}d_A^{3/2}(r/r_{500})^{0.15}`$ (Evrard (1997); Pen (1997)), we estimate the bias on $`d_A`$ at $`z=0.35`$ to be -2% for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ & $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, and -10% for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$; these biases are important relative to the $``$8% difference in $`d_A(z=0.35)`$ between an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ & $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$ cosmology. Correcting for this bias will improve the consistency between our cosmological constraints and those of Rines et al. and Cooray.

## 4. Conclusions

We present the local X-ray Size–Temperature (ST) relation for an X-ray flux limited sample of 45 clusters observed with the ROSAT PSPC (Mohr & Evrard (1997)). We provide an explanation of this scaling relation in terms of underlying scaling relations in the cluster dark matter properties. The observed ST relation is slightly steeper than the self–similar expectation presented in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2.3, but is consistent when the modest variation of the ICM mass fraction $`f_g`$ with $`T_x`$ is taken into account (Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)).

We use our theoretical model for the ST relation to explore its evolution with redshift. Interestingly, for the typical ICM radial distribution observed in nearby and distant clusters, the normalization of the ST relation is not expected to evolve. The lack of evolution makes the ST relation a plausible source of intermediate redshift angular diameter distances. Of course, if cluster structure evolution is very different from the current theoretical expectation, our model ($`\mathrm{\S }`$3.1) will underestimate ST relation evolution. For example, a shift in the mean ICM mass fraction with redshift would bias ST relation distances; to date there is no compelling evidence that distant clusters have different ICM mass fractions in the mean than nearby clusters (e.g. Lewis et al. (1999); Grego et al. (2000)).

We use ROSAT HRI observations of 11 CNOC clusters with measured emission weighted mean ICM temperatures $`T_X`$ to make the first measurements of the intermediate redshift ST relation. Because of the poor image quality, we measure the angular isophotal size $`\theta _I`$ using the best fit circular $`\beta `$ model, rather than measuring it nonparametrically as for the nearby clusters (see Eqn 1). By assuming the cosmological parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ & $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, we show that the slope and zeropoint of this intermediate redshift ST relation is statistically consistent with that of the local ST relation (see Fig 3.1). In addition, we examine the relation for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ & $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ (see Fig 3.2), showing that although the slope is consistent, the zeropoint is different at greater than 3$`\sigma `$ significance.

Finally, we use this cluster sample and our ST relation evolution model to place cosmological constraints. Given the quality of the cluster images and temperature measurements, it is not surprising that a wide range of cosmological models is consistent with the data. Nevertheless, this sample of 11 intermediate redshift distances is sufficient to rule out $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ with between 2$`\sigma `$ and 3$`\sigma `$ confidence. Taken together with ICM mass fraction constraints on the cosmological matter density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M<0.44`$ at 95% confidence (Mohr, Mathiesen & Evrard (1999)), the cluster ST relation exhibits a slight preference for universes with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$; models with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ are inconsistent with the ST relation at between 1 and 2$`\sigma `$. When considering only models where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$, we can rule out $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$ with 3$`\sigma `$ confidence.

With the higher quality X-ray images and ICM temperature measurements available from Chandra and XMM, a significant tightening of these constraints and further tests of the underlying evolution model will be possible. Comparison of local and distant $`M_{ICM}T_X`$ relations, which are more sensitive to cluster evolution, would provide important constraints on these models. In addition, observations with a new generation of Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect instruments (Carlstrom et al. (1999); Mohr et al. (1999); Holder et al. (2000)) will allow us to more accurately constrain the evolution of cluster structure. With these future observations of intermediate and high redshift clusters, we plan to continue using the ST relation as a tool to provide cosmological constraints independent of those derived from recent high redshift SNe Ia observations (Schmidt et al. (1998); Perlmutter et al. (1999)).

JJM is supported by Chandra Fellowship grant PF8-1003, awarded through the Chandra Science Center. The Chandra Science Center is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory for NASA under contract NAS8-39073. EDR is supported by NASA GSRP Fellowship NGT5-50173. EE acknowledges support provided by the National Science Foundation grant AST 9617145. AEE acknowledges support from NSF AST-9803199 and NASA NAG5-8458. This research has made use of data obtained through the High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center Online Service, provided by the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The controversy behind the mechanism which governs high temperature superconductivity (HTS) in cuprates is a subject of current interest, as can be verified in the recent literature .

Anderson  attributes the novel phenomenology present in cuprates materials to a second kind of metallic state, namely, the Luttinger liquid. Zhang  has proposed a SO(5) theory of cuprate superconductivity which considers that the phenomenology of these materials might be fundamentally due to a conflict between different kinds of order. Chianchi, Moretti and Piazza  have presented a phenomenological model for the formation of Cooper pairs in cuprate superconductors: in their description, coupling is mediated by large anharmonic oscillations along $`\widehat{c}`$ direction of the apical ions. On the other hand, Beschoten et al  have investigated the charge transport in insulating and superconducting samples of $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$, in terms of the Hall mobility. The main motivation behind Beschoten et al work  was that the interplay of localization and superconductivity is of fundamental interest in the physics of electrons (holes) in strongly correlated and disordered systems such as the high-temperature superconductors (HTSC).

The aim of this paper is to propose a phenomenological model to explain the resistivity and the Hall mobility behaviors inferred from Beschoten et al data , performed in $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$. The strategy of our work is first to propose a model Hamiltonian to describe the $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$ and then to study its dynamics in the random phase approximation (RPA). After doing that, we use the obtained characteristic frequency (time) in the Drude formula, in order to obtain the resistivity of the system. The Hall mobility will also be studied by using the above results.

Gaona and Silva , inspired in the Gorter-Casimir (GC) two-fluid model of superconductivity , as well in the formalism used to treat the phase transitions in hydrogen-bonded ferroelectrics , have proposed an effective transverse Ising model (TIM) to describe both metallic and HTS superconductivity. We think that an extension of this previous model could be useful to describe some basic features of Beschoten et al  experiment.

Let us first make some considerations about two well-established phenomenological theories of the superconductivity. One of the main characteristics of the superconducting state is the macroscopic phase coherence of the wave function. In 1950, Ginzburg and Landau  introduced their phenomenological theory of superconductivity, where the order parameter must be identified with the macroscopic wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. They started from the idea that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ represents some effective wave function of the superconducting electrons. $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ can be normalized in such a way that $`\left|\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^2`$ is equal to the concentration $`n_s`$ of superconducting electrons. It seems that the pioneering theory to treat the thermodynamic behavior of the superconducting state was proposed by Gorter and Casimir (GC) . The two-fluid model of Gorter and Casimir was proposed to provide a basis for understanding the thermodynamic of the superconducting state. In this phenomenological theory it is assumed that the electrons in a superconductor are divided into two interpenetrating gases: the superconducting electrons, which have zero entropy, and the normal electrons, which have the usual properties of electrons in a normal metal. The normal electrons give up the condensation energy $`\beta `$ when they become superconducting. The authors proposed that below $`T_c`$ a fraction $`y`$, where $`y`$ depends on the temperaure $`T`$ of the conduction electrons occupy a set of lower ”condensed” energy states which are associated with the superconducting properties, while the fraction $`(1y)`$ remains uncondensed. The free energy function for the whole electronic assembly is made up of two terms: one, $`F_N`$, is similar to the electronic free energy of a normal metal and the other, $`F_S`$, corresponds to the condensation energy associate with the condensed state ,

$$F_N=\frac{1}{2}\gamma T^2\text{}F_S=\beta $$
(1)
where $`\gamma `$ is the normal electronic specific heat coefficient, and $`\beta `$ is a constant representing the condensation energy. Gorter and Casimir assumed that the phases were not independent, and proposed the following free energy function:

$$F(T,y)=\left(1y\right)^{1/2}F_N+yF_S\text{ .}$$
(2)
Close to $`T_{c\text{ }}`$we may express (2) in the standard Ginzburg-Landau form by expanding $`F(T,y)`$as a power series in $`y`$, assuming $`y=\left|\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^2`$, and retaining the first nonvanishing terms. The model has acquired support by its success to interpret all properties of superconductors. In particular, the temperature dependence of the penetration depth is correctly predicted .

An inspection of the GC free energy relation (2) reveals that it contains two contributions: the first one is related to the property of free electrons in metals to transpose the Fermi barrier, being responsible for the transport properties and consistent with the Pauli exclusion principle. This term also contains a multiplicative factor which takes into account the fact that, below $`T_c`$, the number of normal electrons in the superconducting sample is a temperature dependent quantity. The second term of the GC free energy is responsible for the pairing of wave functions of the electron condensate. This term is also temperature dependent (indeed, it is proportional to the number of the electrons in the condensate) and above $`T_c`$ it does not contribute to the GC free energy. So, the GC free energy clearly displays the competition between these two terms.

On the other hand, a very successful model to treat various cooperative phenomena is the Ising model. However, the Ising model suffers from a deficiency, namely, the impossibility to exhibit a proper dynamics. Perhaps the simplest extension of the Ising model with a proper dynamics is the transverse Ising model (TIM). The TIM has been used to describe phase transition in ferroelectrics, ferromagnets and cooperative Jahn Teller systems . This model Hamiltonian was first proposed by De Gennes  based on arguments developed by Blinc  to represent the basic features of hydrogen-bonded ferroelectrics of the KH2PO4 family. In these systems the Ising term corresponds to the interaction between the protons at different lattice sites and the transverse field accounts for the possibility of protons occupying one of the two minima of a double potential well in a given site.

## 2 The Model Hamiltonian

Taking into account the preceding considerations, we propose the following effective Hamiltonian as a means to describe some transport properties of the $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$. We write:

$$H=\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{1}{2}\underset{i}{}C_i\mathrm{\Omega }\underset{i}{}\frac{1C_i}{2}X_i\frac{1}{2}\underset{ij}{}L_{ij}\frac{1C_i}{2}Z_i\frac{1C_j}{2}Z_j\text{ .}$$
(3)
The main ideas that we have in mind are:

i-) The third term of (3) is an Ising-like term, where the operator $`Z`$ is related to the wave function of the condensate electrons (holes), and the coupling $`L_{ij}`$ favors the pairing of electrons (holes) at two different lattice sites, contributing to the coherence of their wave functions below the critical temperature $`T_c`$.

ii-) In the second term of (3) the operator $`X`$ is related to the wave function of the normal electrons (holes), where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ represents the transverse field or tunneling constant. This term, which gives dynamics to the model, could be thought as the kinetic contribution to the model Hamiltonian. It could also represent a mimic for the motion of ”free” electrons (holes) through the Fermi barrier, in close analogy with the tunneling of protons through the double-well potential barrier in the KH2PO4-like (hydrogen-bonded ferroelectrics) case (see ). However, while in KH2PO4 the proton tunneling occurs between the right and left sides of the potential well, in the present model we consider the possibility of the electron (hole) to tunnel between the two discrete values of the phase $`\phi `$ of its wave function, namely between $`\phi =0`$ and $`\phi =\pi `$. According to this point of view, the spontaneous symmetry breaking will occurs when the system makes the choice between one of these two particular phases of the wave function.

iii-) In the first term of (3), $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ represents the metal-insulator activation energy, and the operator $`C`$ will assume the eigenvalues +1, when the electron (hole) occupies the ground state (insulator), and -1, when it occupies the excited state (metal or superconductor). We observe that the electron (hole) could change the phase of its wave function only in the -1 eigenstate of $`C`$. The interaction of electrons (holes) between different lattice sites, which leads to the cooperative effect of the superconductivity, occurs only in this last case.

With respect to the operators which appear in the Hamiltonian (3), we would like to make the following remarks: $`X`$ and $`Z`$ will be treated as linear independent operators in the space of spin-1/2, described by the Pauli matrices. The operator $`C`$, which has eigenvalues +1 and -1, could be treated as a ” z component ” of a spin-1/2 operator in another space. In this way, the Hamiltonian (3) is defined in the space product of the operators $`C`$ and ( $`X,Y,Z`$ ).

Before finishing this section, it is worth to mention that a Hamiltonian of the kind described by (3) was used by Ohtomi and Nakano  to explain the role of the pressure in determining the order of the phase transition in hydrogen-bonded ferroelectrics. They however treated (3) only in the static case, namely in the mean field approximation (MFA).

## 3 The Dynamics of the System

The Dynamics of the system will be treated by applying the RPA to the Heisemberg equations of motion. We have (with $`\mathrm{}=1`$)

$$\frac{dP_i}{dt}=i[P_i,H]_t\text{ ,}$$
(4)
where the operators $`P_i=X_i`$, $`Y_i`$, $`Z_{i\text{ }}`$must satisfy the Pauli commutation relations,

$$[X_i,Y_i]=i\delta _{ij}Z_i\text{, … .}$$
(5)
To solve (4) in the RPA, we write

$$P_i_t=P_i+\delta P_ie^{i\omega t}\text{,}$$
(6)
where in (6) we make the replacement of $`P_i_t`$ by a constant part $`P_i`$, which is just the mean field approximation (MFA) expected value, plus a small time-dependent deviation $`\delta P_ie^{i\omega t}`$.

Using (5) and (6), keeping only terms which are linear in the deviation $`\delta P_i`$ and by putting $`Y=0`$, we have the following set of linearized equations:

$`i\omega \delta XL_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{1C}{2}}\right)Z\delta Y=0`$

$$\text{ }i\omega \delta Y\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]\delta Z+L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)Z\delta X=0$$
(7)
$`i\omega \delta Z+\mathrm{\Omega }\delta Y=0`$

The solutions of (7) are:

$$\omega _1=0$$
(8)
and

$$\omega _{2,3}^2=\mathrm{\Omega }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]+\left[L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)Z\right]^2\text{,}$$
(9)
which are constrained by the zero-order solution

$$\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]Z=0\text{ .}$$
(10)
In the following we are interested only in the characteristic frequency of the electrons (hole) in the non-superconducting phase, i.e., in the phase given by $`Z=0`$ .

Putting $`Z=0`$ in $`\omega _{2,3}^2`$ given by (9) and dropping the subscripts for sake of simplicity we have:

$$\omega ^2=\mathrm{\Omega }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]$$
(11)
which leads to:

$$\omega _\pm =\pm \left\{\mathrm{\Omega }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]\right\}^{1/2}\text{.}$$
(12)
In (12) the values of $`C`$ and $`X`$, in the MFA, are given by

$$X=\frac{1}{2}tgh\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2k_\beta T}\right)$$
(13)
and

$$C=tgh\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }X}{2k_\beta T}\right)\text{ .}$$
(14)
## 4 Transport Properties

### 1 Evaluation of the Resistivity

To evaluate the resistivity we will work with the Drude formula,

$$\rho =\frac{m}{pe^2\tau }$$
(15)
where $`m`$ is the effective mass of the carriers, $`p`$ their concentration, $`e`$ the electronic charge and $`\tau `$ the scattering time.

Let us now make the link between the dynamics of our model and the Drude formula. Since the carriers concentration must be an increasing function of the $`Ca`$ concentration, $`f\left(z\right)`$, and must be a maximum when all the electrons (holes) occupies the excited state $`\left(C=1\right)`$ and a minimum for the ground state $`\left(C=+1\right)`$, we propose:

$$p=n\text{ }f\left(z\right)\left(\frac{1c}{2}\right)^2\text{ ,}$$
(16)
where $`n`$ is the density of carriers which are able to form cooper pairs. We also assume  that

$$n=\frac{2}{\xi _{ab}^2\xi _c}\text{ ,}$$
(17)
where $`\xi _{ab}`$ and $`\xi _c`$ are respectively the in-plane and the perpendicular coherence lengths. The number 2 corresponds to the assumption that in the superconducting phase we will have only a cooper pair by ”unit cell” of volume $`\xi _{ab}^2\xi _c`$.

By putting

$$\tau =\frac{1}{2\left|\omega _\pm \right|}$$
(18)
in (15) we get

$$\rho =\left(\frac{2m}{e^2}\right)\frac{\left|\omega _\pm \right|}{p}\text{ , }$$
(19)
and putting (12) and (16) into (19) we get:

$$\rho =\left(\frac{8m}{e^2\mathrm{}}\right)\frac{\left\{\mathrm{\Omega }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]\right\}^{1/2}}{nf\left(z\right)\left(1c\right)^2}\text{ .}$$
(20)
One immediate consequence of relation (20) is that the onset of the superconductivity is reached when the term in the square-root goes to zero. This corresponds to the softening of the mode which frequency is given by equation (12).

### 2 Hall Mobility

To make a connection between our model and the Hall mobility $`\mu `$, we will consider the one-band model  where the Hall effect is inverse proportional to the carrier concentration $`p`$:

$$R_H=\frac{1}{pe}\text{ .}$$
(21)
Using this assumption we will have for the mobility

$$\mu =\frac{R_H(T,z)}{\rho (T,z)}=\frac{e}{2m\left|\omega _\pm \right|}\text{ ,}$$
(22)
where we have used (19) to obtain the right side of (22).

Putting (12) into (22) we finally obtain

$$\mu =\frac{\left|e\right|\mathrm{}}{2m}\left\{\mathrm{\Omega }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]\right\}^{1/2}\text{ .}$$
(23)
### 3 A Possible Mode of Vibration

We also can evaluate the resistivity with an equivalent way of writing the Drude formula

$$\rho =\frac{mv_F}{pe^2l}.$$
(24)
where $`v_{F\text{ }}`$ is the Fermi velocity and $`l`$ the mean free path of the electrons (holes).

As a means to determine the electron (hole) mean free path we start with the classical formula

$$l=\frac{1}{n\pi \overline{r^2}}\text{ .}$$
(25)
We observe that in (25) we have considered the number of scatter centers by unit of volume to be equal to the density of Cooper pairs given by (17). We can justify this by the argument that the electric conduction always occurs in a regime of charge neutrality.

The electron (hole) mean free path, $`l`$, remains to be linked to the model’s dynamics. Alternatively, we can work with the collision cross-section $`\pi \overline{r^2}`$ taking into account equation (25). To do this let us write the ”resonance” condition:

$$\frac{1}{2}K\overline{r^2}=2\mathrm{}\left|\omega _\pm \right|\text{ .}$$
(26)
In (26), we have considered the equality in energy between a classical harmonic oscillator of elastic constant $`K`$ and the energy separation of a two-level quantum system, which frequencies $`\omega _{\pm \text{ }}`$are given by (12).

Initially we are going to determine the elastic constant $`K`$ through the following arguments. It seems natural to consider that the Debye frequency $`\omega _{D\text{ }}`$ and the mass $`M`$ of the oxygen ion must play an important role in the scattering of the charge carriers. So, let us write the relation:

$$K=\alpha M\omega _D^2\text{ .}$$
(27)
We can suppose that in (27) $`K`$ is an effective elastic constant, where $`\alpha `$ , an adjustable perhaps small pure number, could be interpreted as a mimic for a weak coupling regime of the BCS  model.

Inserting the informations contained in the equations (25) and (26) into (24), we obtain

$$\rho =\left(\frac{4\pi n\mathrm{}mv_F}{e^2K}\right)\frac{\left|\omega _\pm \right|}{p}\text{ ,}$$
(28)
and putting (12) and (16) into (28) we get:

$$\rho =\left(\frac{16\pi mv_F}{e^2K}\right)\frac{\left\{\mathrm{\Omega }\left[\mathrm{\Omega }L_0\left(\frac{1C}{2}\right)X\right]\right\}^{1/2}}{f\left(z\right)\left(1C\right)^2}\text{ .}$$
(29)
Since (19) and (28) are two equivalent ways of writing the resistivity, we obtain

$$K=2\pi n\mathrm{}v_F\text{ .}$$
(30)
On the other hand an estimate of the Fermi velocity $`v_{F\text{ }}`$was given in reference , in terms of the electron (hole) mass and the in-plane coherence $`\xi _{ab}`$, namely,

$$v_F=\frac{3}{2}\frac{\mathrm{}}{m\xi _{ab}}\text{ .}$$
(31)
Putting (17), (27) and (31) into (30), we get

$$K=\alpha \left(M\omega _D^2\right)=\frac{6\pi \mathrm{}^2}{\xi _{ab}^3\xi _cm}\text{ .}$$
(32)
The fact that the right side of (32) depends only on the in-plane and perpendicular coherence lengths and on the effective mass $`m`$ of the carriers leads to the conjecture that it is possible to find a mechanism accounting for the elastic constant $`K`$. In the following we are going to look for this possibility.

In a previous work by one of the present authors , an effective potential was proposed to describe the interaction between electron pairs (holes) relating the size of this super carrier to the energy of the bound state. By considering the particular situation that the particle occupies the minimum of this effective potential and that the motion of the pair is confined in a plane , we found that this problem could be mapped into that of the quantum mechanical behavior of a particle described by polar coordinates in a plane. The solution of this quantum mechanical problem leads to an eingevalue spectrum which is doubly degenerate, except for the ground state. In the first excited state we have two eingevalues of the momentum $`q`$, namely:

$$q_\pm =\pm \frac{\mathrm{}}{\xi _{ab}}\text{ .}$$
(33)
We may consider that a pair of electrons (holes) circling in opposite directions establishes a ring of charge and that an oxygen ion could experiment the electric field of these pair of carriers. This leads to an oscillatory motion of the oxygen ion perpendicular to the plane, and in the case of small oscillations, this motion could be described by a harmonic oscillator which frequency $`\omega _{0\text{ }}`$is given by:

$$M\omega _0^2=\frac{e^2}{\pi \epsilon _0\xi _{ab}^3}\text{ .}$$
(34)
Now, if we make the identification of the left side of (34) with the elastic constant $`K`$ given by (32), we obtain:

$$\xi _c=\left(\frac{4\pi \epsilon _0}{e^2}\right)\frac{3\pi }{2}\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{m}\text{ .}$$
(35)
So, according to our model the perpendicular coherence length $`\xi _c`$ is inversely proportional to the effective mass $`m`$ of the charge carriers.

## 5 Comparison with the Experiments and Numerical Estimates

Let us now compare the experimental results of Beschoten et al  with the present model. We may consider that the role played by the addition of $`Pr`$ in the $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$ is to promote certain kind of dilution which is responsible by the decreasing of the critical temperature of the material. We assume that the dilution affects both the values of the ”tunneling constant” $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, as well as the activation energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In order to understand this, let us look at figure 1. In this figure we have a double-well potential where the minimum corresponds to one of the two values of the discrete phases of the local wave function, $`\phi =0`$ or $`\phi =\pi `$. The parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ corresponds to the separation in energy between the ground and the excited states. In figure 2 we show that the effect of the tunneling is to make the splitting of the excited state in two sub-levels. The system could become superconductor as far as $`\mathrm{\Omega }/2>\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Therefore the critical concentration of $`Ca`$ ions ($`z_c`$), i.e., the concentration below which we have no more the superconducting state, will occur at $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Looking at the resisivity formula given by (20), we can observe that its temperature dependence is controlled by the parameters of the model. So for $`\mathrm{\Omega }>2\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the onset of the superconductivity is reached when:

$$X_{T=T_c}=\frac{2\mathrm{\Omega }}{L_0\left(1C_{T_c}\right)}\text{ ,}$$
(36)
where $`X`$ and $`C`$ are given by (13) and (14), respectively.

In the numerical estimates of the resistivity (equation (20)), we have three adjustables parameters: the tunneling constant $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, the activation energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the ratio between the coupling and the tunneling constants $`L_0/\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Table 1 shows the values of the parameters adjusted to reproduce the experimental data findings of Beschoten et al  . In figure 3 we plot in a semi-logarithmic scale the resistivity (equation (20)) of the $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$ as a function of the temperature for various values of the dilution $`z`$. We used, in evaluate $`n`$ given by (17), $`\xi _{ab}=15\AA `$ and $`\xi _c=3\AA `$ , and $`m`$ is the electron rest mass.

$`z`$    $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$    $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$    $`L_0/\mathrm{\Omega }`$    0.3    12.62    24.0    4.2    0.4    9.68    19.0    4.0    0.5    7.61    15.0    3.8    0.6    5.35    11.0    3.2    0.7    1.31    2.8    4.1    0.9    0.9    2.1    5.0

Table 1: Adjusted parameters values for various $`Ca`$ concentrations ($`z`$) in

$`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$ ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ are in units of $`10^{21}J`$).

A linear relationship between $`z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Omega }`$ can be infered from the data of table 1. From this relation we can estimate a value for the critical concentration, $`z_c`$, approximately $`0.51`$, corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Omega }=1/2`$.

In the numerical estimates of the resistivity for the $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$, in the version of equation (29), we have used $`\alpha `$ as an adjustable parameter. $`M`$ is the mass of the oxygen ion, $`\omega _{D\text{ }}`$is the Debye frequency given by $`k_\beta \theta _D/\mathrm{}`$, where we used for the Debye temperature $`\theta _D=300K`$ . We have adjusted $`\alpha =0.005`$, consistent with the value of $`M\omega _0^2`$ obtained in (34).

We also obtain for $`\xi _c`$, using equation (35), the value of approximately $`2.5\AA `$.

Beschoten et al  have investigated the inverse of the Hall mobility, $`\mu ^1`$, in $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$ cuprate. They found that the mobility of the conduction holes evolves from the insulator $`(z<z_c=0.52)`$ to the high temperature superconductor ($`z>z_c`$) by using a one-band model with a single scattering time in order to fit the experimental data. Their main result is that, even for high Ca content, $`z>z_c`$ , where the system becomes a superconductor, they still clearly observe a minimum in the inverse mobility, although its resistivity is purely metallic (this indicates that, even in these samples, the superconducting wave function is formed by states which are spatially localized).

However in our results we can not observe those minima in the inverse mobility (equation (23)) for $`z>z_c`$, although they are present for $`z<z_c`$.

In figure 4 we use the zeros of the inverse Hall mobility and the minimum of it ( for $`z<z_c`$) as a mean to construct a diagram separating the various regimes: insulating, superconducting and metallic. This diagram agree with the experiments (figure 4 of reference ) unless for the fact that it does not reproduce the coexistence of superconducting and localization (insulating).

## 6 Concluding remarks

It seems that the model proposed in this paper can capture the main features which are present in the transport properties of the $`Bi_2Sr_2(Ca_zPr_{1z})Cu_2O_{8+y}`$. In particular, we have evaluated the resistivity which agree with the experimental data of Beschoten et al .

From the evaluated inverse Hall mobility we extracted a diagram $`T`$ (temperature) versus $`z`$ (concentration of $`Ca`$ ions) showing the various regimes of the system, namely metallic, localized (insulating) and superconducting regions.

By comparing two alternative ways of writing the Drude formula of resistivity, and by finding a possible mode of vibration (equation (34)) very relevant to the problem, we can led to a relation which links the effective mass of the carrier (hole) to the perpendicular correlation length $`\xi _c`$ (equation (35)).

The present research has been supported partly by CNPq-Brazil.


text:
# Mitigating Charge Transfer Inefficiency in the Chandra X-ray Observatory’s ACIS Instrument

## 1 Introduction

The Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS) instrument on the Chandra X-ray Observatory (O’Dell & Weisskopf, 1998) employs bulk front-illuminated (FI) and back-illuminated (BI) CCDs to give good spectral resolution and good 0.2–10 keV quantum efficiency (QE) (Bautz et al., 1998). These devices, designed and manufactured at MIT’s Lincoln Laboratories (Burke et al., 1997), couple with the Chandra mirrors to provide spatially-resolved X-ray spectroscopy on spatial scales comparable to ground-based optical astronomy.

Due to the unanticipated forward scattering of charged particles (probably mainly $``$100 keV protons, Prigozhin et al. (2000)) by the Chandra mirrors onto the ACIS CCDs, the FI devices have suffered degraded performance on-orbit, most pronounced at the top of the devices, near the aimpoint of the imaging array. This radiation first encounters the gate structure of FI devices, causing charge traps that increase the charge transfer inefficiency (CTI) of these devices, resulting in gain variations, event grade distortions, and degraded energy resolution as a function of row number. Due to the manufacturing process, the ACIS BI devices have always shown modest CTI effects, but the silicon covering the gates protects them from severe radiation damage on-orbit so they show no additional CTI. Our ongoing efforts to mitigate the BI CTI by modeling and post-processing the data allow us to address the new problem of FI CTI in a timely fashion.

Figure 1 (upper panel) illustrates the effects of CTI on the ACIS I3 chip by showing the row-dependent gain and energy resolution for spectral lines in the External Calibration Source (ECS) (from low to high energy: Al K$`\alpha `$, Ti K$`\alpha `$,$`\beta `$, Mn K$`\alpha `$,$`\beta `$). The data were filtered to keep ASCA-like grades 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (“g02346”, Yamashita (1995)) only. Note that the charge loss is more severe at higher energies (the loci steepen with line energy). This dataset, obtained after the damage was discovered and satellite operations were modified to prevent further degradation, is representative of the state of the CTI from mid-September 1999 to the end of January 2000, when the ACIS focal plane temperature was lowered from -110C to -120C. At this new colder temperature, the trap population that causes the row-dependent energy resolution is partly suppressed (Gallagher et al., 1998).

CTI redistributes the charge in each event among the pixels in the 3$`\times `$3 island (grade “morphing”) as some charge traps release their charge on short timescales, so that charge reappears in adjacent pixels. This grade morphing, coupled with the standard g02346 grade filtering, causes the QE to vary with event energy and position on the device.

We have developed and optimized a model of CTI that accounts for charge loss and the spatial redistribution of charge (“trailing”), in both the parallel and serial registers, thus reproducing the spatially-dependent gain, QE, and grade distribution of these devices. By forward modeling of these effects separately for each event, we produce a “CTI-corrected” event list that is useful for data analysis and astrophysical interpretation.

For the BI devices, we must model parallel and serial charge loss and trailing independently to match the data. There are charge traps in the imaging array, framestore array, and serial register. Since the FI devices were damaged by radiation that penetrates only a few microns into the device (Prigozhin et al., 2000), their (shielded) framestore arrays and serial registers are protected. So, although the CTI is more pronounced on FI devices, it is easier to model than in the BI devices. Our techniques are described in more detail, with more emphasis on the BI devices, in a separate article (Townsley et al., 2000).

## 2 The Model

Our CTI model is phenomenological, characterizing the effects of CTI in the data rather than directly modeling the spatial distribution and time constants of the trap population (see Gallagher et al. (1998) and Krause et al. (1999) for examples of such physical models). The charge lost and trailed into the adjacent pixel are given by $`L=k_1C^{k_2}`$; $`T=k_3L^{k_4}`$ where $`C`$ is the charge in a single pixel, $`L`$ is the charge lost per pixel transfer, $`T`$ is the charge trailed per pixel transfer, and the $`k`$’s are the CTI parameters. We chose power law functional forms for these relations because they adequately fit the data and ensure zero charge loss or trailing when there is zero charge present. The parameters $`k_1`$$`k_4`$ are determined by fitting lines to pixel amplitude versus x and y chip positions for many energies. Examples of each of these fits are shown in Townsley et al. (2000). To apply CTI to a given event, these equations are calculated for each pixel in the event, then the resulting numbers are multiplied by the number of pixel transfers to determine how much charge to remove from each pixel in the event. The trailed charge is then added back into the appropriate adjacent pixel.

Note that our model is “local” – prediction of the amount of charge lost by a particular event does not consider the possibility that another event falling in the same columns but closer to the amp will have filled some portion of the traps, reducing the charge loss from its nominal value (Gendreau et al., 1995). We do however consider shielding effects that may occur within the nine pixels of a single event. For example, an isolated pixel of height 1000 Data Numbers (DN, the digital units of charge output by ACIS, $``$4 eV) will encounter more empty traps (suffer more loss) than a pixel of height 1000 DN that is immediately following a pixel of height 400 DN. The “leading” pixel’s charge is sacrificed to fill the traps encountered by the event, shielding the 1000 DN pixel. Thus we apply our loss model only to the portion of the pixel’s charge that is larger than its predecessor’s. In this example, the 1000 DN pixel will suffer loss and trailing approximately the same as a 600 DN isolated pixel. Details of the shielding model are given in Townsley et al. (2000).

Although ACIS FI devices do not exhibit serial CTI, they do show a small charge loss effect which is proportional to the distance between the CCD pixel and the left or right edge of the CCD. This is believed to be caused by the slight drop in clocking voltages suffered between the middle of the CCD and the supply leads at the chip edges (M. W. Bautz, private communication). CTI scales the effect so that these gain variations are row-dependent, with the bottom rows of the chip showing virtually no variation and the top rows varying by up to $``$100 DN at high energies ($``$6 keV). We model this gain variation for each amp as a linear function of distance from the readout node, averaging over all rows.

To account for nonlinearities not modeled directly by the fits described above, we also incorporated a “CTI deviation map” into our model that refines the CTI for each event’s specific location on the chip. This map is produced by examining the residual gain variations left after the basic model is applied. By correcting ECS data with and without this deviation map, we have determined that including it improves the final results. See Townsley et al. (2000) for details.

## 3 The Corrector

Having modeled CTI, we can try to remove its effects from actual ACIS events, taking a forward-modeling approach. For each observed event, we first hypothesize the nine pixel values of a corresponding true event, i.e. the event that would have been obtained if no CTI effects were present. This true event is passed through the CTI model, producing a model event. The hypothesis is then adjusted pixel-wise by adding the difference between observed event and model event to true event and repeating the process. This iterative adjustment continues until model event and observed event differ by less than one DN, at which point true event constitutes the CTI-corrected event.

The performance of the corrector in removing the observed spatial variation of event energy in ECS data is shown in the lower panel of Figure 1. The corrector has largely removed the gain changes across the device. Since the spectral broadening with row number is primarily the result of a random process involving one of the trap species (Antunes et al., 1993), it cannot be suppressed in our reconstructed events.

The success of the CTI corrector in regularizing the grade distribution at the top of an FI device is shown in Table 1, combining a broad range in energies (0.5–7 keV) made up of the Al, Ti, and Mn calibration lines. For example, 43.6% of events migrated from grade 2 to grade 0 during CTI correction.

Table 1 demonstrates an improvement in QE after CTI correction. Figure 2 illustrates this in more detail. For low-energy events (e.g. Al K) the charge is more spatially concentrated, leading to more single-pixel events. CTI causes these to morph into grades that are still captured in the standard grade filtering, so the QE at the top of the device is not affected by CTI. At higher energies (e.g. Mn K) events are often intrinsically split, so grade morphing causes them to be lost to ASCA-like grade 7. The corrector can recover some of these events, but clearly the QE is still row-dependent. This is due in part to telemetry constraints: certain ACIS grades are not transmitted to the ground because they are primarily cosmic ray events and would saturate telemetry. When CTI causes legitimate photon events to grade morph into these grades, they are lost forever. Other events are not recovered into their original grades because the corrector is unable to recover charge that has been eroded by CTI down below the split threshold – at that level, the charge is indistinguishable from noise and the corrector is purposely not allowed to include such pixels in its reconstruction. Note that the bottom quarter of the device is largely unaffected by the CTI degradation and thus retains the original performance of the detector.

The CTI corrector consists of a set of IDL (Research Systems Inc.) programs and parameter files that instantiate the model for each amplifier on each CCD, for a given epoch of the Chandra mission. The code is available (www.astro.psu.edu/users/townsley/cti/corrector/) and may be of interest to other groups concerned with the results of radiation damage on X-ray and optical CCD detector systems. This website is intended to provide an example of the corrector, not an exhaustive and complete set of correction code immediately applicable to any dataset.

## 4 Model Uncertainties

The FI corrector must be optimized to match the CTI present at the time of the observation in question, since the CTI has changed over the course of the mission. This can be achieved by tuning the corrector’s parameters on the ECS dataset taken most closely in time to the target observation. There is an uncertainty introduced by using calibration data to tune this or any other model: we must assume that the CTI measured by the ECS is representative of that present in celestial data. Most ACIS events are due to particle interactions and are not even telemetered. It is primarily these events that fill traps and thus regulate CTI. Since most of these particle events are from cosmic rays that are not stopped by the Observatory structure, it is reasonable to assume that ECS and celestial data have comparable particle fluxes, thus a comparable trap population.

We have used the instrumental Au L$`\alpha `$ (9.7 keV) and Ni K$`\alpha `$ (7.5 keV) lines as rough diagnostics of the corrector’s performance on celestial data. Tests show that the corrector works fairly well even at these high energies (well above the energies used to tune it), reducing the charge loss per pixel transfer by a factor of $``$10. Better results might be obtained by hybridizing the corrector optimization process to include both celestial and ECS data.

Another implication of tuning the corrector to ECS data is that we have no calibration information below Al K$`\alpha `$ (1.486 keV). Understanding the behavior of the CCDs between 0.2 and 1.5 keV is important for obtaining accurate hydrogen column densities, comparing ACIS results to ROSAT results, and inferring valid astrophysics for the large number of soft sources Chandra will examine. As a preliminary example, we consider the supernova remnant E0102-72.3, used as a soft calibration source for Chandra. The CXC provided us with two calibration datasets on this target (N. Schulz, private communication), one with the target near the readout of Node 2 on the I3 chip (“obsid 49”) and a second with the target half-way up the chip (“obsid 48”), on the same node. An observation with the target near the top of the chip is scheduled and will be included in subsequent analysis.

These data were obtained in January 2000 but CTI-corrected with the code tuned to ECS data obtained the previous September. Even though the corrector was not tuned below 1.486 keV and was based on the CTI present 4 months prior to the E0102-72.3 observations, the corrected data for both observations showed the soft lines in this source at the correct energies to within $`\pm `$1% above 800 eV and to within $`\pm `$2% between 500 and 800 eV. The grade distributions before and after correction were identical, to within statistical uncertainties, for obsid 49. Grade migration was noticeable in the raw data from obsid 48. CTI correction restored the grade distribution to values consistent with obsid 49. With future data we hope that E0102-72.3 can be used to calibrate the corrector as well as to check it.

The uncertainties outlined above should encourage ACIS users to treat their data with care and caution. This is especially important for public calibration targets observed before mid-September 1999, as the CTI was changing rapidly then.

## 5 Astrophysical Implications

Users of ACIS data must be aware of CTI and its spatial and spectral effects in order to generate astrophysically relevant results. Without CTI correction, accurate analysis of ACIS data requires a strongly position-dependent response matrix (“.rmf file”) and QE map (part of the “.arf file”). These of course depend on the user’s choice of grade filtering; it is not clear that the usual ASCA-like grade filtering is optimal for sources far from the readout nodes.

Our CTI corrector improves the photon energy estimates and significantly corrects for grade morphing. The corrector also improves the energy resolution of the ACIS devices more than can be achieved by only accounting for the row-dependent gain variations. Using these features, we recover linewidths in the External Calibration Source data that are on average 10% narrower (for both FI and BI detectors) than parallel gain detrending alone can provide.

These features mean that CTI-correcting ACIS event lists will yield several benefits for the end user. Correcting for grade morphing yields more high-energy counts and thus gives deeper source detection for hard sources; since most source-finding algorithms rely on a threshold number of counts to constitute a detection, adding even a modest number of counts can increase the number of detections significantly. For example, $``$15% more hard (2–8 keV) sources were detected in the ACIS GTO observations of the Hubble Deep Field and surroundings after CTI correction (Hornschemeier et al., 2000). Corrected event energies are necessary to obtain valid hardness ratios for faint point sources and to compare the spectral properties of faint sources distributed across a field. Improved energies and more uniform QE will also yield better spectrally-resolved imaging of extended sources, an important technique for studying supernova remnants, for example.

The corrector cannot totally eliminate the position-dependent energy resolution of the FI devices or the energy- and position-dependent QE. Thus position-dependent response matrices and effective areas are still necessary for the most accurate spectral fitting and flux determinations.

The CXC provides a tool (“MKRMF”) that allows the user to generate spatially-dependent .rmf files for spectral analysis of CTI-affected data. In principle, we might use this tool for ACIS spectroscopy while still benefiting from the CTI corrector. As an example, the event list should be CTI-corrected before any grade filtering is applied, since the corrector can ameliorate grade morphing. Then the standard g02346 grade filtering will yield an event list containing valid X-ray events that is larger than that obtained by filtering on the original event list. Selecting these events out of the original event list will give the best subset of events for spectral analysis. The MKRMF tool is then still applicable, as the observer will be using the original event list. Such a method might be useful for spectral analysis of moderately faint sources, where including additional photons would improve the spectral fits.

Also necessary for spectral fitting is the “MKARF” tool that incorporates the CCD QE into the .arf files. Currently, MKARF overestimates the high-energy QE for FI devices, since it presumes pre-launch values. This will lead to underestimates of the high-energy flux, corrupting the temperatures or spectral indices obtained in model fits. It should be possible, though, to treat CTI-induced QE changes as an energy-dependent multiplicative correction to the .arf file after it is generated, for either original or CTI-corrected data.

For even more detailed spectro-spatial analysis, especially for extended sources, we have incorporated our CTI model into the Monte Carlo simulator that we developed to model ACIS devices (Townsley et al., 2000). Work is ongoing (G. Chartas, private communication) to couple this CCD model with astrophysical models from XSPEC (Arnaud, 1996) and raytracing via MARX (Wise et al., 1997). This will eventually allow complete forward modeling to reproduce the data and optimize spectral fitting results.

Efforts continue throughout the entire Chandra community to improve the performance of the ACIS devices and our understanding of that performance. We expect the methods described here to be useful for current data but eventually to be superceded for future data by modifications to the instrument operations and software that are under development now at MIT. Laboratory work by MIT (Prigozhin et al., 2000) and PSU (Hill et al., 2000) scientists is yielding new insight into the damage mechanisms and providing data useful for calibrating and assessing mitigation techniques. In the meantime, our CXC colleagues are providing tools for coping with CTI-affected data and suggesting observing strategies that allow most ACIS users to accomplish their basic science goals.

Financial support for this effort was provided by NASA contract NAS8-38252. We thank our MIT/ACIS colleagues, especially Mark Bautz and Gregory Prigozhin, for many helpful discussions and suggestions regarding CCD modeling and for their lucid explanations of the device physics of radiation damage and charge traps. We thank the CXC and MSFC Project Science Team for providing a forum for discussion of CTI and other ACIS calibration issues and we especially thank Harvey Tananbaum for a careful review of this paper that greatly improved its relevance to the X-ray astronomy community.