text:
# Abundance Constraints and Direct Redshift Measurement of the Diffuse X-ray Emission from a Distant Cluster of Galaxies

## 1 Introduction

The heavy element abundances and their distribution in the intracluster medium (ICM) of galaxy clusters provides us with important information on the evolution of the cluster galaxies, the clusters themselves, and possibly the universe as a whole. By tracing the evolution of the global metal content of the ICM, one can obtain useful information on the epoch where the last major star formation in cluster galaxies took place and enriched the diffuse cluster gas. If clusters are fair samples of the universe, then studies of the evolution of the ICM metallicity also constrain the star formation history in the universe. Supernova explosions, which are the main contributor to metal enrichment, may also provide a significant source of heating for the ICM. Therefore, a knowledge of the metal content of galaxy clusters allows one to estimate the total amount of energy supplied by supernova explosions (e.g. Pipino et al. 2002).

X-ray spectroscopic observations provide a powerful means to probe the metal content of the diffuse gas in clusters. In the late 70’s, the iron line emission was discovered in the X-ray spectra of galaxy clusters (e.g. Serlemitsos et al. 1977). It was later found that the ICM in z $``$ 0 clusters of galaxies has been enriched in iron to approximately $`1/3`$ of the solar value (e.g. Edge & Stewart 1991). ASCA and BeppoSAX showed that the metallicity of the ICM stays constant at its local value $`Z=0.3Z_{}`$ out to z $``$ 0.4 (e.g. Mushotzky & Loewenstein 1997; Allen & Fabian 1998; Della Ceca et al 2000; Matsumoto et al 2000; Ettori, Allen & Fabian 2001). These observations clearly indicate that a significant amount of the metals produced by supernovae were injected by z $``$ 0.4.

With Chandra and XMM-Newton (XMM) observations on distant clusters, the evolution of chemical abundances beyond z = 0.4 can be investigated, thus extending the previous analysis based on ASCA and BeppoSAX data (e.g. Jones et al. 2003; Arnaud et al. 2002; Jeltema et al. 2001; Maughan et al. 2003; Worrall et al. 2003; Holden et al. 2002). Tozzi et al. (2003) analyzed mostly-Chandra data of 18 distant clusters with redshift 0.3 $`<`$ z $`<`$ 1.3. They report, using a combined spectral fit of cluster subsamples in different redshift bins, that the mean Fe abundance at z $``$ 0.8 is $`Z=0.25_{0.06}^{+0.04}Z_{}`$, consistent with the local metallicity value. Unfortunately, for clusters at redshift z $`>`$ 1, they could only provide weak constraints for the metallicity ($`Z=0.21_{0.05}^{+0.12}Z_{}`$ )even after combining four clusters.

The cluster RXJ1053.7+5735, which shows an unusual double-lobed X-ray morphology, was discovered during our deep (1.31 Msec) ROSAT HRI pointings (Hasinger et al. 1998a ), in the direction of the “Lockman Hole”, a line of sight with exceptionally low HI column density. The angular size of the source is 1.7 $`\times `$ 0.7 arcmin2 and two lobes are approximately 1 arcmin apart. The total X-ray flux of the entire source in the 0.5-2.0 keV band is 2 $`\times `$ 10-14 erg cm-2 s-1 (Hasinger et al. 1998b ). Our subsequent deep optical/NIR imaging follow-ups (V $`<`$ 26.5, R $`<`$ 25, I $`<`$ 25, K $`<`$ 20.5) with LRIS and NIRC on Keck, and the Calar Alto Omega Prime camera revealed a bright 7 arcsecond-long arc with an integrated magnitude of R=21.4 as well as an overdensity of galaxies in both X-ray lobes (e.g. Thompson et al. (2001)). Further Keck LRIS/NIRSPEC spectroscopic observations on the bright arc and one of the brightest galaxies near the arc showed that the former is a lensed galaxy at a redshift z = 2.57 while the latter is at a redshift of z = 1.263 (Thompson et al. (2001)). Deep VRIzJHK photometry data produced concordant photometric redshifts for more than 10 objects at redshift of z $``$ 1.1-1.3, confirming that at least the eastern lobe is a massive cluster at high redshift. The improbability of chance alignment and similarity of colors for the galaxies in the two X-ray lobes were consistent with the western lobe also being at z $``$ 1.1-1.3 (Thompson et al. (2001)). Meanwhile, the X-ray data of the XMM observation (with a total effective exposure time $``$ 100 ks) performed during the PV phase for this cluster were analyzed (Hashimoto et al. 2002), yielding a best-fit temperature of 4.9 $`{}_{0.9}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+1.5}`$ keV, while the metallicity was poorly constrained with an upper limit on the iron abundance of 0.62$`Z_{}`$.

Here we report on a deep $``$ 1 Msec XMM observation of the cluster RXJ1053.7+5735, based on the data obtained during the PV, AO-1, & AO-2 phases. The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. 2, we briefly describe the observation and data reduction. In Sec. 3, we first present spectroscopic analysis of the entire cluster, then of each lobe. In Sec. 4, we present a discussion of the metallicity evolution, as well as the comparison between the X-ray redshift and optical/infrared redshifts. All uncertainties quoted are at the 68% confidence levels for a one interesting parameter fit. Throughout the paper, we use $`H_o`$ = 65 km s-1 Mpc-1, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$=0.3, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$=0.7

## 2 Observations and Data Reduction

The cluster RXJ1053.7+5735 was observed as a part of the XMM Lockman Hole observation with European Photon Imaging Camera (EPIC) during the period April 27-May 19, 2000 (rev. 70, 71, 73, 74, and 81) for $``$ 170 ks (PV phase), the period Oct. 25-Nov. 4, 2001 (rev. 344, 345, and 349) for $``$ 199 ks (AO-1), and the period Oct. 15-Dec. 7, 2002 (rev. 522-528, and 544-548) for $``$ 920 ks (AO-2). Both EPIC cameras, pn and MOS, were operated in Full Frame mode and with the medium optical blocking filter for the bulk of time, except for the PV observation, where the thin filter was used for pn, and thin and thick filters were used for MOS. The light curves were visually inspected, and we discarded the data corresponding to the high particle background ($`>`$ 8 ct/s for the pn, and $`>`$ 5.2 ct/s for MOS1 and MOS2 inside the entire fov in the 0.5-10keV band). The data with pattern $`>`$ 4 and pattern $`>`$ 12 were also excluded for pn and MOS, respectively, retaining only single and double events for pn, and single to quadruple events for MOS. We further removed those events with low spectra quality (i.e. FLAG $`>`$0). The remaining exposure times after this cleaning is approximately 648 ks, 738 ks and 758 ks for pn, MOS1, and MOS2, respectively.

## 3 RESULTS

### 3.1 Overall Cluster Analysis

The spectra were extracted from an elliptical region centered at the cluster image with a semi-major/minor axis 1$`\stackrel{}{.}`$2 & 0$`\stackrel{}{.}`$6, respectively The backgrounds were estimated from a co-centric annulus region surrounding the cluster with 1$`\stackrel{}{.}`$3 (inner) and 2$`\stackrel{}{.}`$1 (outer) radii, after removing point sources. We obtain 4605 and 4305 net source counts (in the 0.2-10.0 keV band) for pn and MOS(1+2), respectively.

To correct for vignetting effects, we used the SAS V5.4.1 task EVIGWEIGHT (Arnaud et al. 2002), so that we can use on-axis effective areas. This task computes a weight coefficient for each event, defined as the ratio of the effective area at the photon position and energy to the central effective area at that energy, including filter transmission and quantum efficiency. Redistribution matrices are generated by the SAS RMFGEN for each pointing, filter, and detector, and then combined for joint analysis. We regrouped all the source spectra so that no energy bin had fewer than 50 counts. We fitted the spectra with a redshifted MEKAL model (e.g. Mewe et al. 1985; Kaastra & Mewe 1993) using the XSPEC V11.0 (Arnaud 1996). We fit pn and MOS data (MOS1 and MOS2 are merged) jointly with common temperature, abundance, and redshift, while using separate normalization for each dataset, and fixing the column density of neutral hydrogen $`N_\mathrm{H}`$ at a value of 5.6 $`\times `$ 1019 cm-2 (Dickey & Lockman 1990).

In Fig. 2, the results of the best-fits are shown, while Fig. 3 shows the two-parameter $`\chi ^2`$ contours for the cluster metallicity and X-ray temperature. The best-fit values based on a simultaneous fit are $`kT`$ = 3.9 $`{}_{0.2}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.2}`$ keV, an abundance of 0.46 $`{}_{0.07}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.11}`$ times the solar value, and a redshift z = 1.14 $`{}_{0.01}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.01}`$. Using the best-fit model parameters, we derived an unabsorbed (0.2-10) keV flux of $`f_{0.210}`$ = 2.8 $`\times `$ 10-14 erg cm -2 s-1, corresponding to a luminosity in the cluster rest frame of $`L_{0.210}`$ = 2.4 $`\times `$ 1044 erg s-1 and a bolometric luminosity of $`L_{bol}`$ = 2.8 $`\times `$ 1044 erg s-1. Note that the best-fit redshift is consistent with the redshift range derived by the photometric redshift technique (Thompson et al. 2001), while it is significantly lower than the NIR spectroscopic redshift (z=1.26) of one galaxy in the eastern lobe near the gravitational arc. We will further comment about this point in §4.

### 3.2 Substructure

As illustrated in Fig. 1, the cluster RXJ1053.7+5735 shows a clearly double-lobed structure, which extends roughly in the east-west direction. Using a circular (radius = 0$`\stackrel{}{.}`$47) extraction region centered at each lobe, X-ray characteristics are investigated for the substructure.

Fig. 4 shows X-ray spectra and residuals for the eastern lobe (top panel) and for the western lobe (bottom panel). Fig. 5 shows two-dimensional $`\chi ^2`$ contours at 68.3%, 90%, and 99% confidence levels ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2`$=2.30, 4.61 and 9.21) for the eastern and western lobes of the cluster temperature and redshift, obtained from the joint fit to the pn and MOS data. Our fitting for each lobe shows that $`kT`$ is 3.4 $`{}_{0.1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.2}`$ keV & 4.4 $`{}_{0.3}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.3}`$ keV, the redshift is 1.16 $`{}_{0.03}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.02}`$ & 1.14 $`{}_{0.01}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.02}`$, and the abundance is 0.41 $`{}_{0.16}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.18}`$ & 0.62 $`{}_{0.14}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.15}`$ for eastern and western lobe, respectively (Table 1). Note that the redshifts of two lobes agree within a statistical limit, consistent with the interpretation that two lobes are at close physical distance.

To investigate the indication of detailed temperature variations in the cluster, we created an X-ray ‘hardness ratio’ map, whose structure may be interpreted as temperature variations. The X-ray hardness ratio map is created, first, by making hard (1-8 keV) and soft (0.2-1 keV) band images, then by dividing the hard band image by the soft band image. Two images are separately smoothed before the division with a Gaussian with $`\sigma `$ = 7″. This map is shown in Fig. 6. The full-band (0.2-8 keV) contours are overlaid on the hardness map. Inset shows the hardness ratio map of the $`\beta `$ model ($`\beta `$=0.67, $`r_c`$=17$`\stackrel{}{.}`$2) convolved with the detector PSF at the position of the cluster (westlobe). The inset covers the region of the sky identical to the main figure of Fig. 6. The profile of each pointing and each detector in 0.2-1, 1-2, 2-5, and 5-8 keV bands are separately created by the SAS V.6.0 emldetect task with a parameter extentmodel=beta. The hard band (1-8 kev) is split into three bands and later combined, in order to reflect the cluster X-ray flux in each band. The scale bar in the inset is shown as a reference for the image-size (the color-scales are the same as the main figure). The inset demonstrates that the energy dependence of the detector PSF has negligible effect on the cluster hardness ratio map, where the bulk of the cluster emission is below 5 keV. Fig. 6 shows that the coldest part of the western lobe may be slightly off-centered toward west, while the temperature structures of the eastern lobe is aligned with respect to the full-band contours. The region between the two lobes seems to have similar temperature with the outer region of each lobe, and seems hotter than the bulk of the cluster temperature, however, the influence from the cluster-cluster collision is unclear based on our data. We will further discuss about this point in §4.

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 Cluster Redshift

The redshift of the cluster diffuse gas directly estimated by fitting the X-ray data is z = 1.14 $`{}_{0.01}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.01}`$. This value is within the cluster redshift-range obtained with the photometric redshift technique. However, it is significantly lower than a redshift (z=1.26), of one cD-like galaxy near the eastern-lobe arc, obtained by near infrared spectroscopy. The infrared redshift is practically defined by one line detected at 1.485 $`\mu `$m, which Thompson et al. (2001) interpreted as H$`\alpha `$ in light of its photometric redshift.

If the redshift of this cD-like galaxy were at z = 1.14, as indicated by the X-ray redshift, then this emission line detected in the cD-like galaxy would not correspond to any prominent line. Moreover, no line is detected at 1.404 $`\mu `$m where possible H$`\alpha `$ line should be located, if the galaxy is indeed at z = 1.14. Therefore, it is unlikely that redshift of this particular galaxy is at z=1.14.

The simplest explanation for this redshift discrepancy is: the cD-like galaxy is in the background of the cluster, and therefore, not a member of the cluster (relative velocity $`17,000\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$). Even with the apparent proximity of the cD-like galaxy to the gravitational arc and to the center of the X-ray contour, this explanation is indeed possible. In fact, there is another cD galaxy candidate equally close to the center of the X-ray contour. We obtained DEIMOS/Keck spectroscopy of this galaxy and our preliminary analysis shows that the redshift of the galaxy is consistent with that of X-ray diffuse gas.

### 4.2 Dynamical State of the Cluster

The fact that the X-ray morphology of RXJ1053.7+5735 is double-lobed suggests that we may be witnessing a possible equal-mass merger event at z $`>`$ 1. We could estimate the X-ray redshift separately for each lobe, and the result is consistent with the interpretation that two lobes are a part of one cluster system at the same redshift, although the dynamical state of the system cannot be definitively known from the redshift-information alone.

As for the Tx distribution, as shown in Fig. 6, the inter-lobe region seems hotter than the bulk of each lobe, however it is not clear from the figure that the temperature in that region is actually enhanced, by the mechanism such as a shock induced by the cluster ‘collision’. Relatively abrupt temperature boundary between the low temperature region in the western lobe and the inter-lobe region may be similar with the ‘cold fronts’ observed in local clusters (e.g. Markevitch et al. 2000; Vikhlinin et al. 2001). In these ‘cold fronts’, a sharp temperature gradient forms when a cooler gas blob propagates in a hotter ambient gas. The cold western lobe spot which shows a steep temperature gradient relative to an intermediate hot cluster-intersection region might be interpreted as one such ‘cold front’. Note, however, that our abrupt temperature boundary does not seem to match exactly the densest part of the gas (as shown by the contours) and therefore this tentative interpretation has to be taken with some caution.

Relatively high Fe abundance of RXJ1053.7+5735 is somewhat surprising, particularly considering its redshift. However, it may be explained by the possible existence of ‘densed core’ (or ‘colling flow’) in the cluster, and its relation to the Fe abundance (e.g. Allen & Fabian 1998; see also De Grandi & Molendi 2001). The hardness ratio map of RXJ1053.7+5735 may indicate that the temperature is cooler at the center of each lobe, which is consistent with the cooling flow interpretation. However, this ‘densed core’ feature has been considered to be associated with a relaxed dynamical state of clusters (e.g. McGlynn & Fabian 1984; Edge, Stewart, & Fabian 1992). If the two lobes of RXJ1053.7+5735 are indeed interacting, and are in the process of nearly-equal-mass merger, it would be unlikely that this dynamical state exists inside the cluster, and therefore unlikely to have the ‘densed core’ profile. Unfortunately, the spatial resolution of our data is not sufficient enough to directly investigate the core profile of the cluster RXJ1053.7+5735, and therefore, the implied dynamical state of the cluster remains unknown. Future X-ray observations with high spatial resolution, as well as the optical/NIR spectroscopic observations of individual cluster members, are needed for more definitive statement about the dynamical state of the cluster.

### 4.3 Abundance vs. Redshift

In Fig. 7, we compare our newly measured metallicity for RX J1053.7+5735 with other high redshift clusters observed by XMM or Chandra from Tozzi et al. (2003). For comparison, the low redshift samples from Mushotzky & Loewenstein (1997), and Irwin & Bregman (2001) are also plotted. The black square denotes the new abundance for RX J1053.7+5735. The eastern and western lobes of the cluster are also separately shown (labeled as “East Lobe” and “West Lobe”). The error bars on the abundance are one dimensional 68% confidence range. Some 90% errors quoted in the literature are converted to 68% error by multiplying by a factor 1/1.6.

Several studies report a hint of a weak dependence of global Fe abundance on the temperature in such a way that lower temperature clusters tend to have larger Fe abundances than hot clusters (e.g. Yamashita 1992; Fabian et al. 1994; Mushotzky & Loewenstein 1997; Matsumoto et al. 2000; Tozzi et al. 2003, see however Fukazawa et al. 1998; Fukazawa et al. 2000). This dependence may be related to the correlation between the core profile and Fe abundance, which indicates that more ‘densed core’ or ‘cooling flow’ clusters show the higher Fe abundance (e.g. Allen & Fabian 1998). Regardless of the origin of this Fe dependence on the cluster temperature, Tozzi et al. (2003) subdivided their cluster sample according to the temperature (the ‘hot’ cluster subsample with $`kT>`$ 5 keV and the ‘cold’ cluster subsample with $`kT<`$ 5 keV). They investigated the abundance vs. redshift relation separately for each subsample using a combined fit across all of the subsample clusters in different redshift bins, and reported that at least the high temperature subsample reveals no sign of the evolution in their average abundances up to $`z`$ 1.2.

Fig. 8 shows the abundance vs. temperature relation for the same sample as Fig. 7. The symbols are identical with Fig. 7. The error bars on the temperature are again 68% confidence range. The cluster RXJ1053.7+5735 roughly follows a weak trend that lower temperature clusters tend to have larger iron abundances than hot clusters. Fig. 9 shows the abundance vs. temperature relation for the ‘hotter’ clusters ($`kT>`$ 5 keV: Fig. 9a), and ‘cooler’ clusters ($`kT<`$ 5 keV: Fig. 9b). Again, the black square denotes the new abundance for RX J1053.7+5735, with eastern and western lobes separately shown. For both subsamples, there is no statistically-significant redshift dependence, while the mean abundance is somewhat higher for the cooler subsample. The result is consistent with no-evolution of the Fe abundance at z $``$ 1.2, supporting the scenario that much of the enrichment and star formation took place earlier.

The cluster RX J1053.7+5735 is now one of the first clusters whose X-ray redshift is directly measured prior to the secure knowledge of the cluster redshift obtained with optical/NIR spectroscopy. Deep pointings with the current X-ray satellites provide a powerful means to study the high-redshift clusters, enabling us to directly measure the redshifts, and to probe the metal contents, of the diffuse gas in the clusters. The high-throughput X-ray spectroscopic mission in the future, such as Con-X and XEUS, should make these studies almost a routine.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Pat Henry for a careful reading of the paper and useful comments. XB acknowledges partial financial support by the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología, under project AYA2000-1690. We acknowledge referee’s comments which improved the manuscript.


format: text

text:
# A New Giant Stellar Structure In the Outer Halo of M31

## 1 Introduction

The study of dwarf galaxies offers special insight into the physics of galaxy formation and evolution. There are many fewer dwarf galaxies than predicted by a direct scaling of the dark matter halo mass function (e.g., White & Frenk, 1991). A number of theoretical explanations for this have been explored: feedback from supernovae leading to disruption of dwarf galaxies (e.g., Dekel & Silk, 1986) or strong reduction of their luminous/dark matter ratio (e.g., Hayashi et al., 2003), reduced substructure in warm dark matter haloes (e.g., Moore et al., 2000), enhanced satellite disruption and reionization (e.g., Bullock, Kravtsov, & Weinberg, 2001), or suppression of dwarf galaxy formation through photoionization (e.g., Somerville, 2002). In this context, the dwarf galaxy content of the Local Group plays a special role. The luminosity function can be probed down to very faint limits, where the discrepancies with the models are largest (Moore et al., 1999). Furthermore, the detailed star formation histories of the dwarfs can be estimated through analysis of the colors and magnitudes of their resolved stellar populations. Coupled with the exquisitely deep surface brightness limits achievable through analysis of resolved stellar populations, one can explore the physical processes which shape dwarf galaxy evolution directly, such as ram pressure stripping (e.g., Grebel, Gallagher, & Harbeck, 2003) or tidal disruption by the giant galaxies in the Local Group (e.g., Ibata, Gilmore & Irwin, 1994).

Nevertheless, constructing a complete census of faint stellar structures (dwarf galaxies, disrupted dwarfs, stellar streams) has proved challenging, owing to the twin constraints of imaging depth and large area coverage (see, e.g., Armandroff, Jacoby, & Davies, 1999; Ferguson et al., 2002). In this letter, we report the discovery of a faint, extended stellar feature in the outer halo of M31, using a special scan from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey which reaches depths sufficient to detect stars at the tip of the red giant branch (TRGB). We use these data to estimate the feature’s physical properties and to try to determine its true nature. We assume a distance to M31 of 760 kpc (van den Bergh, 1999).

## 2 Observations and Data Analysis

The Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) (York et al., 2000) is an imaging and spectroscopic survey that will eventually cover about $`1/4`$ of the sky. Drift-scan imaging from the SDSS 2.5m telescope in the five SDSS bandpasses ($`u,g,r,i,z`$) (Fukugita et al., 1996; Gunn et al., 1998; Hogg et al., 2001) is processed through data reduction pipelines to measure photometric and astrometric properties (Lupton et al., 2002; Stoughton et al., 2002; Smith et al., 2002; Pier et al., 2003) and to identify targets for spectroscopy. M31 was observed on 5 October 2002, during time when primary survey areas were inaccessible. The data were obtained in two overlapping strips oriented along the major axis of M31, covering an area of $`18\mathrm{°}\times 2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$. Conditions were photometric, but the seeing varied between $`1\mathrm{}2\mathrm{}`$ FWHM in $`r`$-band. The raw data were processed and catalogs constructed using the same pipeline as Data Release 1 (DR1) (Abazajian et al., 2003). We selected only objects within the coordinate range assigned to each strip, thus eliminating duplicate object detections. In the following, all references to dereddening and conversion from SDSS magnitudes to $`V,I`$ magnitudes (for literature comparison) utilize Schlegel, Finkbeiner, & Davis (1998) and Smith et al. (2002), respectively.

The spatial density of SDSS-detected stars with $`21<i22`$ is shown in Fig. 1. The central regions of M31, its disk, and its bright satellites M32 and NGC205 are too crowded for the standard SDSS photometric pipeline. The slight horizontal “striping” is the result of seeing variations; under better seeing conditions, more stars were detected. This effect is most pronounced at faint magnitudes. Complex stellar substructure is evident in the outer disk and halo of M31 (Fig. 1a). Essentially all of the morphological features visible in Figures 2 and 3 of Ferguson et al. (2002) can also be seen in the SDSS data, although the giant stellar stream to the southeast (Ibata et al., 2001; Ferguson et al., 2002; McConnachie et al., 2003) is truncated by the limited width ($`2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$) of the SDSS scan.

Adjusting the grayscale in Fig. 1a to enhance faint details, we obtain Fig. 1b, in which an overdensity around $`(X,Y)(0.5,3.1)`$, or $`00^\mathrm{h}52\stackrel{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{.}}0+44\mathrm{°}06\mathrm{}`$ (J2000), becomes apparent. The seeing, rather fortuitously, was almost constant in the vicinity of this overdensity, minimizing the striping in this area. The stellar overdensity has its highest concentration at a angular separation of $`3\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$ from the center of M31, and although it is adjacent to the area mapped by Ferguson et al. (2002), it is not covered by the data shown in that work.111Subsequent to initial submission of this work, Lewis et al. (2004) presented a map which clearly shows this feature, although the authors did not comment on its significance.

In order to place constraints on the nature and distance of this new stellar overdensity, we dereddened the data, transformed $`g,r,i`$ photometry to $`V,I`$ magnitudes, and constructed color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) of a region in the outskirts of M31, of the new feature, and of a nearby control field (Fig. 1c). The left side of Fig. 2 shows the Hess diagrams of the M31 periphery (between the two ellipses in Fig. 1), the control field, and the foreground-corrected M31 Hess diagram. The right side of Fig. 2 shows the same for the new, diffuse stellar feature. The new stellar feature has a Hess diagram which is qualitatively similar to that of M31, placing it roughly at the distance of M31, and firmly establishing its extragalactic nature.

## 3 A New Stellar Structure: Andromeda NE

The stellar overdensity revealed in Fig. 1b, which we will call Andromeda NE (And NE) in what follows, covers more than half a square degree. To minimize foreground star contamination in such an extended, faint stellar feature, we selected stars in those Hess diagram bins from the bottom left panel of Fig. 2 with S/N $`3.0`$ (i.e., those likely to be at the distance of M31) for further analysis (cf. Odenkirchen et al., 2001). The SDSS data only include stars near the TRGB (2.6 arcmin-2 at the densest part of the feature), and so to estimate And NE’s peak surface brightness and total luminosity we carefully accounted for this effect. Following the method of Kniazev et al. (2004), we measured the total luminosity of all selected stars in And NE in circular apertures, minus an average stellar background level determined from nearby external fields. Analyzing SDSS data for the Pegasus dwarf irregular (DDO216), a galaxy at a distance comparable to that of M31, we fitted surface brightness profiles to both stars and to the total integrated light in its outer regions, determining offsets of $`2.8,2.5,\mathrm{and}2.0`$ mag in $`g,r,\mathrm{and}i`$ between the ‘resolved-source’ and total surface brightnesses (an $`i`$-band correction of 1.8 mag was derived from the $`i`$-band stellar luminosity function of the Draco dwarf spheroidal given in Odenkirchen et al., 2001, confirming that these estimates are reasonable for a range of likely stellar populations). We then applied these corrections to the And NE measurements, obtaining central surface brightnesses and total magnitudes of $`29\pm 0.4,28.3\pm 0.3,\mathrm{and}27.2\pm 0.3`$ mag arcsec-2, and $`12\stackrel{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{.}}8,11\stackrel{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{.}}4,\mathrm{and}11\stackrel{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{.}}0`$ in $`g`$, $`r`$, and $`i`$-band, respectively. If we assume that And NE is at approximately the same distance as M31 (justified in the next paragraph), and correct for a median foreground extinction of $`A_g0.32(A_V0.28)`$, it has $`M_g11.9(M_V12.7)`$; Local Group dwarfs of comparable luminosity have $`V`$-band surface brightnesses nearly two orders of magnitude higher than And NE (see, e.g., Grebel, Gallagher, & Harbeck, 2003). It is clear that And NE, if it is a galaxy, is a highly unusual one.

We estimated the distance to And NE from the position of the TRGB (cf. Lee, Freedman, & Madore, 1993) in And NE. We generated cumulative dereddened $`I`$-band luminosity functions for stars within the two circular regions shown in Fig. 1c, and subtracted the control field luminosity function from that of And NE. The field-star-subtracted luminosity function rises noticeably at $`I20.4`$; for RGB metallicities in the range $`2.2[\mathrm{Fe}/\mathrm{H}]0.7`$, $`M_{I,TRGB}4.0\pm 0.1`$ (Da Costa & Armandroff, 1990; Salaris & Cassisi, 1998), yielding a distance modulus of $`(mM)_024.4\pm 0.15(760_{50}^{+55}\mathrm{kpc})`$ for And NE. Thus we conclude that And NE is at approximately the same distance as M31. However, the precision of this result is limited by the small number of stars at the TRGB in And NE and the possibility that And NE is extended along the line of sight; significant improvement will likely only be possible using, e.g., more numerous red clump or horizontal branch stars.

What is And NE? To give more insight into its nature, we compared the Hess diagrams for the red giant branch (RGB) in And NE and in three other prominent stellar features: the giant stream, the northern spur, and the G1 clump. For each field, we dereddened the SDSS data, transformed $`g,r,i`$ stellar magnitudes to $`V`$ and $`I`$, subtracted an appropriately scaled control field Hess diagram, and finally divided by the square root of the sum of the target and control field Hess diagrams to estimate S/N in each bin. Fig. 3 shows the results, with overplotted RGB fiducials for Galactic globular clusters spanning a wide range of metallicities. And NE has a “blue” RGB (following the nomenclature of Ferguson et al., 2002), unlike the “red” RGBs shown by the northern spur and the giant stream, from which we infer that And NE has a lower mean metallicity. For this reason, we believe it unlikely that And NE is an extension of either the nearby northern spur or the giant stream.

Interestingly, And NE and the G1 clump have very similar RGB morphologies, despite the large differences in their stellar densities and projected positions (70 kpc on opposite sides of M31’s disk). Moreover, And NE appears to have a faint extension towards the disk of M31. Taken together, these data suggest two possibilities for And NE. The first is that the G1 clump and And NE are both material torn from M31’s disk by an ancient interaction; this possibility is supported by the disk-like kinematics of RGB stars in the G1 clump (Reitzel et al., 2004), but is argued against by the strong difference in RGB morphology between M31 disk stars and And NE (M31’s disk appears more metal-enriched than And NE or the G1 clump; see Figs. 2 and 3). Secondly, it is possible that And NE and the G1 clump are both projections along the orbit of an ancient, diffuse stellar stream roughly in the plane of M31’s disk. The morphology of both features and the lack of similarity between disk and And NE stellar populations support this possibility. The disk-like kinematics of stars in the G1 clump would appear to argue against this scenario, but such a coincidence is not impossible; the Monoceros stream around the disk of the Milky Way (Newberg et al., 2002; Yanny et al., 2003) exhibits prograde, disk-like kinematics (e.g., Penarrubia et al., in preparation).

Having discussed possible stellar stream and stellar debris scenarios for And NE, we turn to the issue of whether And NE is a bound, self-gravitating entity (i.e., a new satellite). We can calculate what mass-to-light (M/L) ratio would be required for it to be gravitationally bound by using an approximation for tidal disruption for a cluster of particles in a circular orbit: $`3M_{\mathrm{M31}}/D_{\mathrm{M31}}^3>M_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}/R_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}^3`$, where $`M_{\mathrm{M31}}`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}`$ are the total masses of M31 and And NE, $`D_{\mathrm{M31}}`$ is the distance of And NE from M31, and $`R_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}`$ is the radius of And NE. The masses are unknown; however, we can calculate the total M/L of And NE that would be required to bind And NE, in units of M31’s M/L at radii $`40`$ kpc. The integrated magnitude of And NE is $`V_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}12.0`$, and using $`V_{\mathrm{M31}}=3.44`$ from the RC3 catalog, and assuming that M31 and And NE have the same reddening and lie at the same distance (therefore $`R_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}=6.6`$ kpc, $`D_{\mathrm{M31}}=43`$ kpc), $`(M/L)_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}30(M/L)_{\mathrm{M31}}`$. This is high enough to argue that, if And NE is at the same distance as M31, it is likely undergoing tidal disruption. Yet, And NE may be rather more distant from M31: if instead we assume that And NE is $`\pm 0.15`$ mag more or less distant (the error in distance determination), one obtains $`(M/L)_{\mathrm{And}\mathrm{NE}}6(M/L)_{\mathrm{M31}}`$. While this latter value still suggests that And NE is being tidally disrupted, accurate velocity and distance data will be required to firmly resolve the question of whether And NE is bound or unbound.

## 4 Conclusions

SDSS has revealed an overdensity of red giant stars $`3\mathrm{°}`$ to the NE of the Andromeda galaxy; Andromeda NE is within $`0\stackrel{\mathrm{m}}{\mathrm{.}}15`$ in distance modulus ($`50`$ kpc) of M31 and is thus not an unrelated foreground or background object. Its extrapolated total $`g`$-band magnitude is $`12.8`$ ($`M_g=11.6`$ or $`5\times 10^6L_{}`$ at 760 kpc), and its radius, although not well-defined, is $`30\mathrm{}`$ (6 kpc). And NE is very diffuse and is probably undergoing tidal disruption, based on its distance from M31 and its morphology. And NE possesses a “blue” RGB, unlike M31’s northern spur, the giant stream, or the outer parts of the present-day M31 disk; yet And NE’s stellar population is similar to the G1 clump, suggesting perhaps a link with this structure. It is possible that it is part of an ancient diffuse stellar stream, or perhaps material torn from M31’s disk in the distant past. Spectroscopic and deep, high spatial-resolution data will be required to further elucidate the nature of this faint, enigmatic stellar feature.

DBZ and EFB respectively acknowledge support from an NSF International Postdoctoral Fellowship and from the European Community’s Human Potential Program contract HPRN-CT-2002-00316, SISCO. Funding for the creation and distribution of the SDSS Archive has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, and the Max Planck Society. The SDSS Web site is (http://www.sdss.org/). The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium (ARC) for the Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are The University of Chicago, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, The Johns Hopkins University, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, University of Pittsburgh, Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.


text:
# Evidence for Early or Efficient Black-Hole Growth

## 1. Introduction

Recent advances that allow virial black-hole masses in nearby quiescent and active galaxies to be measured have opened a new era: with mass measurements we can address issues of the physics of black-hole evolution and its connection with galaxy evolution. Some obvious first questions to ask are what is the typical mass of black holes in AGNs at high redshift, and is this different from those of lower-$`z`$ AGNs? Also, does the typical mass of luminous quasars change beyond the redshift ($`z3`$) at which the co-moving space density of quasars drops dramatically? A study addressing these issues (Vestergaard 2004, hereafter Paper I) is summarized below.

## 2. Mass Estimates

As summarized by Vestergaard at this meeting, obtaining direct virial black-hole mass ($`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$) measurements of large samples of distant quasars is very time-consuming and is, hence, impractical. Instead, $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ estimates can be more easily obtained with scaling relationships and measurements of broad-line width and continuum luminosity in a single-epoch UV or optical spectrum (e.g., Wandel, Peterson, & Malkan 1999; Vestergaard 2002; McLure & Jarvis 2002). The mass estimates presented here were obtained with such scaling relationships (Paper I).

But is it reasonable to assume that scaling relations, even those based on high-ionization lines, are valid for all AGNs and quasars? While the efficacy of the scaling relations is discussed in more detail in Paper I, a few key points are worth emphasizing here. From the demonstrated virial relationships (Peterson & Wandel 1999, 2000; Onken & Peterson 2002) for the broad emission lines, including the high-ionization lines, we know that for a given object the distance to the line-emitting gas and its velocity dispersion each scale between the emission lines: for example, $`v_{\mathrm{FWHM}}^2`$(H $`\beta `$) $`\tau `$(H $`\beta `$) $`v_{\mathrm{FWHM}}^2`$(C iv) $`\tau `$(C iv), where $`\tau `$ is the light travel time delay between the variations in the ionizing continuum and responding line emission. Therefore, any broad emission-line width (for which the virial relationship holds) can be used as a measure of the velocity dispersion, $`v`$(line), at the distance of this line-emitting gas, $`R`$(line) $`=c\tau `$(line). In addition, since all four AGNs that can be tested exhibit this virial relationship, it is fair to assume it is universal in spite of the small number of AGNs on which this conclusion is based. Moreover, for the reasonable assumption that the broad-line region is photoionized one can show that if the radius – luminosity relationship did not apply to the luminous and high-redshift quasars, then their spectra would look very different than they actually do: composite quasar spectra grouped by luminosity and redshift are surprisingly similar at least up to redshifts of $``$4.5 (e.g., Dietrich et al. 2002). Also, the application of the radius – luminosity relation to the most luminous (high-redshift) quasars is only an extrapolation of at most 1.5 dex beyond the luminosity range of 4 dex over which the relationship is defined (Kaspi et al. 2000). Thus, there are no immediate concerns that the radius – luminosity relationship should not apply to typical luminous, distant quasars as well.

## 3. Black-Hole Masses of Distant, Luminous Quasars

Figure 1 shows the distribution of estimated $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ values for several samples of quasars: 87 objects from the Bright Quasar Survey at $`z0.5`$, a sample of $`1.5<z\stackrel{<}{_{}}3.5`$ quasars, and recently published samples of $`z4`$ quasars, including SDSS EDR data (e.g., Anderson et al. 2001; Fan et al. 2001; Constantin et al. 2002). A cosmology with $`H_0`$ = 75 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$, q0 = 0.5, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ = 0 is used. The reader is referred to Paper I for further details. For these samples Figure 2a shows the distributions of the bolometric luminosities, $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$, determined by applying bolometric correction factors to measured monochromatic continuum luminosities. The lower envelopes in both the $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ values are due to the flux limits in the sample selection or in the original surveys. Figure 2b displays the redshift distribution of the Eddington luminosity ratio of the samples. However, the uncertainty in the $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}/L_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$ values is significant ($`\stackrel{>}{_{}}`$0.7 dex) due to the need to apply an average bolometric correction to obtain $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ and due to the accuracy of the $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ estimates (1$`\sigma `$ error is $``$0.5 dex relative to reverberation masses). The observed range in $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}/L_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$ values is the result of selection flux limits (lower envelope) and the combination of a minimum line-width adopted ($``$2000 km/s) to identify quasars and the observed upper $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ envelope. Nonetheless, these crude $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}/L_{\mathrm{Edd}}`$ estimates show that massive, high-$`z`$ quasars have Eddington ratios of order 0.1 $``$ 1.0, as commonly expected, as opposed to super-Eddington or highly sub-Eddington ratios. The main conclusions are:

* Distant, luminous quasars have very massive black holes, even at the highest redshifts. In other words, black holes with very large masses, $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ $`10^9`$$`M_{}`$, exist at large redshifts — beyond the space density drop at $`z3`$ and even as early as $`z`$ 6.
* There appears to be a real physical ceiling of $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ $`10^{10}`$$`M_{}`$ and $`L_{\mathrm{bol}}`$ $`10^{48}`$ergs s-1. This is partly owing to the steep cutoff in the upper end of the luminosity (and mass) function. In addition, this may signify a maximum sustainable mass and luminosity.
* The early appearance of supermassive black holes suggests that they form early or fast. In fact, they may even form faster than the stars in the host galaxy as suggested by studies of high-$`z`$ host galaxies (see below).

The notion that active massive black holes at high-$`z`$ may reside in relatively young galaxies is based on largely circumstantial evidence that host galaxies of AGNs at $`z\stackrel{>}{_{}}`$3 do not typically appear fully formed or have old stellar populations (see Paper I for a more detailed discussion): (a) the presence of large masses of cold molecular gas in high-$`z`$ hosts (i.e., significant fuel exists for future star formation) which for some high-$`z`$ sources are clearly separated from the AGN nucleus or is distinctly extended (e.g., Ohta et al. 1996; Papadopoulos et al. 2000; Carilli et al. 2002, 2003), (b) inferred high star-formation rates from the far-IR luminosities in high-$`z`$ AGNs (e.g., Carilli et al. 2001, 2003; Omont et al.  2001), (c) the presence of large-scale young stellar populations confirmed in at least one well-studied $`z4`$ radio galaxy with high far-IR luminosity, 4C 41.17 (e.g., Dey et al. 1997), (d) the strikingly different morphology of host galaxies of high-$`z`$ radio-quiet quasars and radio galaxies compared to their lower-$`z`$ cousins: radio galaxies exhibit multiple components embedded in large-scale diffuse emission indicative of non-relaxed systems in the process of forming (e.g., van Breugel et al. 1998) while radio-quiet quasars appear to have smaller scale-lengths and a fraction of their final stellar mass (e.g., Ridgway et al. 2001; Papovich et al. 2001), and (e) the presence of massive, active black holes ($`10^8`$$`M_{}`$; marked ‘LBG-AGN’ in Figures 1 and 2) in Lyman-break galaxies at $`z3`$; these are typically small, young starforming galaxies (Steidel et al. 2002). Rix et al. (2001) and Omont et al. (2001) provide independent arguments in favor of a faster build-up of black-hole mass compared to the stellar mass in high-$`z`$ host galaxies.

## References

Anderson, S. F., et al. 2001, AJ, 122, 503

Carilli, C. L., et al. 2001, ApJ, 555, 625

Carilli, C. L., et al. 2002, AJ, 123, 1838

Carilli, C. L., et al. 2003, Science, 300, 773

Constantin, A., et al. 2002, ApJ, 565, 50

Dey, A., et al. 1997, ApJ, 490, 698

Dietrich, M., et al. 2002, ApJ, 581, 912

Fan, X., et al. 2001, AJ, 121, 31

Kaspi, S., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 631

McLure, R., & Jarvis, M. 2002, MNRAS, 337, 109

Ohta, K., et al. 1996, Nature, 382, 426

Omont, A., et al. 2001, A&A, 374, 371

Onken, C., & Peterson, B. M. 2002, ApJ, 572, 746

Papadopoulos, P. P., et al. 2000, ApJ, 528, 626

Papovich, C., Dickinson, M., & Ferguson, H. C. 2001, ApJ, 559, 620

Peterson, B. M., & Wandel, A. 1999, ApJ, 521, L95

Peterson, B. M., & Wandel, A. 2000, ApJ, 540, L13

Ridgway, S. E., et al. 2001, ApJ, 550, 122

Rix, H.-W., et al. 2001, in Gravitational Lensing: Recent Progress and Future Goals, ed. T. Brainerd & C. Kochanek (San Francisco: ASP), 169

Steidel, C. C., et al. 2002, ApJ, 576, 653

van Breugel, W. J. M., et al. 1998, ApJ, 502, 614

Vestergaard, M. 2002, ApJ, 571, 733

Vestergaard, M. 2004, ApJ, 600, in press (Paper I)

Wandel, A., Peterson, B. M., & Malkan, M. A. 1999, ApJ, 526, 579


text:
# S-Z Anisotropy & Cluster Counts: Consistent Selection of 𝜎₈ & the Temperature-Mass Relation

## 1 Introduction

Calculations of the power spectrum of CMB anisotropy induced by the Sunyaev-Zeldovich (S-Z) effect, and of cluster number counts, involve various intrinsic cluster quantities, as well as cosmological and cluster mass function parameters. Specifically, the level of S-Z signal in a cluster is directly related to the intracluster (IC) gas temperature and density distributions. The cosmological and large scale structure parameters enter in the expression for the collective mass function of clusters. Most commonly, this function is assumed to have the Press & Schechter (1974) form, but other, more physically established mass functions, are also widely adopted. The mass function is usually normalized by specifying an observationally deduced value of $`\sigma _8`$, the rms density fluctuation on a scale of $`8h^1`$ Mpc. The value of $`\sigma _8`$ may be deduced in several different ways, perhaps most directly from a comparison between the observed two-point correlation function of galaxies or clusters of galaxies, and the spectrum of the primordial density fluctuation field on the relevant scales, recently employed in the analysis of the large SDSS sample (e.g. , Tegmark et al. 2003). Measurements of CMB anisotropy yield a globally averaged value of $`\sigma _8`$, most recently deduced from the first year WMAP measurements (Bennett et al., 2003). Additionally, $`\sigma _8`$ has been deduced from fitting X-ray cluster data (luminosity or temperature functions) to the corresponding theoretical models, with the latter derived from a mass function upon assuming a specific mass-luminosity or mass-temperature relation.

Deduced values of $`\sigma _8`$ clearly depend on data quality, modeling, and analysis methods, as is reflected in the current wide range, $`0.5\sigma _81.2`$. Joint analysis of the SDSS and WMAP databases yields the current ‘best’ (with 6 free ‘vanilla’ parameters) value, $`\sigma _8=0.917_{0.072}^{+0.090}`$ (Tegmark et al. 2003). This is roughly in agreement (e.g., Wu 2001) or somewhat lower (Viana & Liddle 1999) than results from X-ray cluster studies. The wide range of values of $`\sigma _8`$ has significant implications on the level of various cosmological quantities. Here we explore some of its consequences for the abundance of clusters, and in particular the power of S-Z anisotropy and cluster number counts, quantities that depend steeply on $`\sigma _8`$. Since we concentrate here on clusters, the emphasis will be on values of $`\sigma _8`$ deduced from cluster X-ray measurements, particularly of gas temperatures. Pertinent key features of such analyses are properties of the cluster sample (e.g. , completeness, temperature and redshift ranges), the adopted mass function model, and the mass-temperature relation used to convert the mass function into a temperature function. By comparing the latter function to the observed temperature function, $`\sigma _8`$ (and other parameters, such as $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$) can be determined.

In this paper we focus on consequences of the choice of the temperature-mass (TM) relation on $`\sigma _8`$, and their impact on the predicted S-Z angular power spectrum and cluster number counts. A quantitative assessment is given of the impact of inconsistent choice of the TM relation and $`\sigma _8`$ on the predicted levels of the the S-Z anisotropy and the number of clusters to be observed by the Planck satellite. Our main goal here is to improve some of the technical aspects in the calculations of these quantities, and to partly explain the large variance among previous estimates of the S-Z power spectrum.

The paper is arranged as follows: the need for a consistent choice of $`\sigma _8`$ and the TM relation, the method employed to extract $`\sigma _8`$ from the observed temperature function, and the variation of $`\sigma _8`$ with the choice of the TM relation are described in § 2. The importance of consistent choice is addressed once more in § 3 and § 4, where its consequences on the S-Z angular power spectrum and cluster number counts are quantified and further elaborated upon in § 5.

## 2 TM-$`\sigma _8`$ Relation

### 2.1 Method

The calculation of the S-Z power spectrum involves the basic cosmological and large structure parameters, properties of IC gas, and the cluster mass function (MF). Of the various methods that have been used to calculate the S-Z anisotropy, we employ the approach described in Colafrancesco et al. (1994, 1997), which we have recently updated and generalized (Sadeh & Rephaeli 2003). The calculation will not be described here; full details are given in the latter paper.

In a cluster temperature-mass relation (TMR) the gas temperature is a monotonically increasing function of mass; $`TM^{2/3}`$ in virial equilibrium. The temperature function may be written in terms of the MF by

$$N(T)dT=N[M(T)]\frac{dT}{dM}dM.$$
(1)
Since at the high mass end the MF is to a good approximation a monotonically increasing function of $`\sigma _8`$, it can be formally shown (Sadeh & Rephaeli 2003) that:

1. TM relations which predict higher (lower) temperatures for a given mass yield lower (higher) $`\sigma _8`$, and therefore, lower (higher) cluster density.

2. Calculations of the S-Z power spectrum employing a specific TMR, and a value of $`\sigma _8`$ different from the one that would have been extracted by adopting this relation, will result in mis-estimation of S-Z power. The power level will be overestimated (underestimated) when, for a given TMR, the adopted value of $`\sigma _8`$ is higher (lower) than the value corresponding to that particular TMR.

We adopt the procedure developed by Pierpaoli et al. (2001) for the determination of $`\sigma _8`$ from an observationally based temperature function. Given a list of X-ray cluster temperatures and their corresponding redshifts, the temperature function can be deduced. The theoretical MF – with $`\sigma _8`$ as the free parameter – is converted into a temperature function given an assumed TM relation. This is calculated at redshift $`z=0.057`$, the median redshift of the particular X-ray catalog used. The temperature range in the catalog is divided into a large number of bins, and the mean occupation number of clusters in each of these bins is computed by multiplying $`n(T)dT`$ at the bin temperature by the effective volume occupied at this temperature, i.e., the volume of space to which clusters in the bin can be observed, denoted by $`V_i`$ . A large number of mock catalogs is now devised by using the listed temperatures as the mean of a normally distributed variable, and their $`1\sigma `$ errors as its variance. The temperature bins are now scanned so as to determine whether any of these is occupied by clusters in the mock catalog. Occupation numbers are assigned to each one of the bins. Assuming a Poissonian distribution of the cluster occupation numbers, the probability of finding $`N_i`$ clusters in bin $`i`$ is estimated using the Poissonian distribution, with $`n(T)dTV_i`$ interpreted as the distribution mean. Finally, the likelihood function of obtaining the ‘observed’ occupations in all bins simultaneously is constructed, and maximized against $`\sigma _8`$.

### 2.2 TM Relations

We employ five TM relations found in the literature; three of these have the same functional form, differing only in the temperature normalization for a fiducial cluster at redshift $`z=0`$ with mass $`10^{15}h^1M_{}`$. The five functions are identified here as models 1-5:

*Model 1 (Colafrancesco et al 1997):*

$$T=5.78(1+z)\left(\frac{M}{10^{15}h^1M_{}}\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{1/3}\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Omega }_0,z)}{\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1,z=0)}\right]^{1/3}.$$
(2)
*Model 2 (Tomita 2003):*

$$T=5.2\gamma (1+z)\left(\frac{M}{10^{15}h^1M_{}}\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{1/3}\left[\frac{\rho _{vir}(z)}{18\pi ^2}\right]^{1/3},$$
(3)
where $`\gamma =1.2`$.

*Model 3 (Henry 2000):*

$$T=\frac{7.98keV}{\beta _{TM}}(1+z)\left(\frac{M}{10^{15}h^1M_{}}\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{1/3}\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Omega }_0,z)}{18\pi ^2}\right]^{1/3},$$
(4)
where $`\beta _{TM}=1.21`$.

*Model 4 (Pierpaoli et al. 2001):*

$$T=\beta \left(\frac{M}{10^{15}h^1M_{}}\right)^{2/3}(\mathrm{\Delta }_cE^2)^{1/3}\left(12\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)}{\mathrm{\Delta }_c}\right),$$
(5)
where $`E^2=\mathrm{\Omega }_m(1+z)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

*Model 5 (Molnar & Birkinshaw 2000):*

$$T=2.76\beta ^1\frac{1\mathrm{\Omega }_0}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{2/3}}\left(\frac{M}{10^{15}h^1M_{}}\right)^{2/3}\left[\left(\frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{sinh}\eta \eta }\right)^{2/3}+\frac{n_p+3}{5}\right],$$
(6)
where $`\beta `$ and $`n_p`$ are taken to be $`1`$ and $`1.4`$, respectively, ($`n_p`$ is the ‘effective’ power index on cluster scales), $`\eta =\mathrm{cosh}^1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Omega }_m(z)1}}\right]`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m(z)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_0(1+z)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0(1+z)+(1\mathrm{\Omega }_0)}}`$.

The first three relations may all be written in the form

$$T=\alpha (1+z)\left(\frac{M}{10^{15}h^1M_{}}\right)^{2/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{1/3}\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_c(\mathrm{\Omega }_0,z)}{18\pi ^2}\right]^{1/3},$$
(7)
where $`\alpha =5.78,6.24,6.59`$ in models (1),(2), (3), respectively. In a flat universe with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`\alpha `$ is equal to the temperature of a local cluster with mass $`10^{15}h^1M_{}`$. In the currently fashionable (‘standard’) $`\mathrm{\Lambda }CDM`$ model, substituting $`z=0.053`$ in the above relations, the temperatures associated with clusters having this mass are $`3.43keV,3.71keV,3.92keV,6.19keV,8.49keV`$, respectively.

### 2.3 Results for $`\sigma _8`$

To verify the validity of the first assertion made in the previous subsection, $`\sigma _8`$ has been estimated using equation 7 with $`5.5\alpha 7.0`$. For each value of $`\alpha `$ ten runs were made and average values of $`\sigma _8`$ were computed. A more statistically complete analysis would require a much larger number of runs for each value of $`\alpha `$, but the consistency of the results suggests that this is not needed for our purposes here. The input and output of the runs are tabulated in table 1 and illustrated in figure 1. It is clear from the plot that (as expected) $`\sigma _8`$ is quite sensitive to the choice of the TM relation. In fact, a relative variance of $`30\%`$ in the temperature scaling – which is in accord with typical observational uncertainties – induces a relative change of $`20\%`$ in the value of $`\sigma _8`$. This has important practical consequences given that the mass function is extremely sensitive to this parameter. Moreover, these results are in accordance with the qualitative argument summarized above: A TM relation which associates a higher temperature with a given mass yields a lower value of $`\sigma _8`$, and vice versa. The calculated five values of $`\sigma _8`$ are $`1.32,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.23},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.18},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.00},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.68}`$, for models 1-5, respectively.

## 3 Dependence of the Power Spectrum on $`\sigma _8`$ and the TMR

The S-Z power spectrum was calculated (Sadeh & Rephaeli 2003) employing the five models described above. We first calculated the power for each of the five TM relations and its matching $`\sigma _8`$, and then crossed these inputs by taking the TM relation of model $`i`$ and $`\sigma _8`$ corresponding to model $`j`$, where $`ij=15`$. Results of the first calculations are shown in figure 2; these reflect the tight relation between the magnitude of the power spectrum and the cluster population. Note that although lower temperatures (implied by a ‘colder’ TM calibration) will tend to reduce the power, the influence of the higher $`\sigma _8`$ dominates, resulting in a higher level of power.

The results of the second set of ‘cross’ calculations are described in figure 3. Each panel contains three curves; the solid curves represent calculations employing a specific TMR and its corresponding $`\sigma _8`$. The dash-dotted curves show results of the calculations employing the same TMR as for the solid curves, but a different $`\sigma _8`$. Finally, the dashed curves show results for the same $`\sigma _8`$ as in the dash-dotted curves, but with the TMR that corresponds to this parameter, thereby providing a ‘correction’ to the results illustrated by the dash-dotted curves. In order to further clarify the results, the first row will be considered as an example: In the first panel (2nd from the left) the TMR of model 1 is used; here the temperatures are lowest, and $`\sigma _8`$ assumes the highest value; the solid curve describes this case. Now $`\sigma _8`$ is changed to the value extracted using model 2, i.e., a lower value. However, in combination with the TMR of model 1, the power spectrum is underestimated, since the TMR of model 2 should have been used, rather than that of model 1. Indeed, model 2 predicts higher temperatures than model 1, and therefore the correct power spectrum is represented by the dashed curve. Obviously, as the difference between the correct $`\sigma _8`$ and the one employed in the calculation increases, the degree of underestimation (or overestimation) also increases, as can be seen in the next panels of the first row. The relative errors introduced by the inconsistent choice of these two elements can be readily calculated; this is presented in figure 4. As anticipated, the panels lying on both sides of the diagonal show lower relative errors than those located further away from the diagonal, where differences between adopted and correct values of $`\sigma _8`$ are larger. Errors of up to a factor of $`5`$ are caused by this parameter mismatch. The relative errors among the first three models are constant along the multipole axis due to their functional uniformity. In other cases the relative error changes with $`\mathrm{}`$.

The dependence of the S-Z power on $`\sigma _8`$ has already been discussed in previous works, it is usually demonstrated by arbitrarily changing its value. Although the change is not great (as the ones required in order to induce a relative error of hundreds of percents as seen in figure 4), a difference of $`20\%`$ (e.g. $`\sigma _8=0.91.1`$) or more is common. Examples for large errors induced by a change of $`18\%`$ in $`\sigma _8`$ may be seen in the third panels of the third and fourth rows of figure 4: in the third row the correct and unmatched values of $`\sigma _8`$ are $`1.18`$ and $`1.0`$, respectively, and a relative error of $`4050\%`$ appears around $`\mathrm{}=1000`$. In the fourth row the correct and unmatched values are $`1.0`$ and $`1.18`$, respectively, and a relative error of $`>50\%`$ is induced.

The steep dependence of the S-Z power on $`\sigma _8`$ was quantified by the proportionality $`C_{\mathrm{}}\sigma _8^{67}`$ (e.g., Komatsu & Tetsu 1999). Our results indicate that this dependence is somewhat more moderate, which is to be expected since an increase of $`\sigma _8`$ implies a decrease in temperature by virtue of the anti-correlation between these two parameters, as has been shown above and illustrated in figure (1). For the three representative value of the multipole (marking the range in which the peak of the S-Z power spectrum occurs) $`\mathrm{}=1000,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2000},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3000}`$, we plotted the corresponding $`C_{\mathrm{}}`$s in models 1-5 against their corresponding $`\sigma _8`$. Best fits describing the three sets of five data points all have slopes $`4`$, smaller than the values ($`67`$) previously reported. This is illustrated in figure (5). For comparison, we include figure (6), in which the same analysis is applied, but here the TMR models 2-5 are used in conjunction with the $`\sigma _8`$s extracted using models 1-4. The corresponding power spectra are represented by the dash-dotted curves in the four panels under the central diagonal of figure (3). Recall that the resulting power spectrum in this case is overestimated due to the fact that the TMR used in its evaluation would necessitate a lower $`\sigma _8`$ than the one used in the calculation. Thus, a steeper slope is expected in the $`\mathrm{log}C_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{log}\sigma _8`$ plot, which is indeed the case. The resulting slopes are actually steeper ($`13`$) than $`a67`$, but the essential result of this analysis is that the scaling $`C_{\mathrm{}}\sigma _8`$ is indeed sensitive to the adopted TMR and its normalization.

## 4 Dependence of Cluster Counts on $`\sigma _8`$ and the TMR

As is well known, the fact that the S-Z effect is independent of redshift makes it an (almost) ideal tool for the detection of distant clusters. Cluster surveys are planned by several S-Z projects, culminating (according to current plans) with the full sky mapping by the PLANCK satellite. The 143 GHz and 353 GHz channels of the HFI experiment on PLANCK are particularly suitable for detecting large numbers of clusters. The S-Z flux from a cluster is given by (e.g. Colafrancesco et al. 1997)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F_\nu (\gamma _{\mathrm{}})=R_s(|\widehat{\gamma }\widehat{\gamma _{\mathrm{}}}|,\sigma _B)\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu (\widehat{\gamma })𝑑\mathrm{\Omega },$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu `$ is the change of the CMB spectral intensity due to the thermal component of the S-Z effect. In the non-relativistic limit, $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu =g(x)=x^4e^x(e^x1)^2\left[x\mathrm{coth}(x/2)4\right]`$, where $`T_0`$ is the CMB temperature, and $`y`$ is the Comptonization parameter integrated along a los. The more accurate expression for $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu `$ includes relativistic corrections (Rephaeli 1995, Itoh et al. 1998, Shimon & Rephaeli 2003). Since our main aim here is to display the dependence of cluster number counts on $`\sigma _8`$ and the TMR – rather than precisely predicting the expected number of clusters – we use the simpler non-relativistic limit of $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu `$. We can then write for the S-Z flux

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F_\nu =\frac{2(k_bT_0)^3}{(hc)^2}g(x)y_0R_s(|\widehat{\gamma }\widehat{\gamma _{\mathrm{}}}|,\sigma _B)\zeta (|\widehat{\gamma _{\mathrm{}}}|,M,z)𝑑\mathrm{\Omega },$$
(9)
where

$$\zeta (|\widehat{\gamma _{\mathrm{}}}|,M,z)\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+(\theta /\theta _c)^2}}\mathrm{tan}^1\left[p\sqrt{\frac{1(\theta /p\theta _c)^2}{1+(\theta /\theta _c)^2}}\right].$$
(10)
The measured signal is actually weighted over the spectral response of the detector, $`E_\nu `$, usually approximated by a Gaussian, $`G_\nu `$. Therefore,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{F}_\nu =\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }F_\nu E(\nu )𝑑\nu }{E(\nu )𝑑\nu }.$$
(11)
For simplicity, $`G_\nu `$ is taken here to be uniform over the passband centered on the central frequency. For the PLANCK/HFI $`143`$GHz channel, beam size is $`8^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\nu /\nu =0.25`$. The predicted number of clusters with flux greater than $`\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{F}_\nu `$ can now be calculated using

$$N(\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{F}_\nu )=r^2\frac{dr}{dz}𝑑z_{\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{F}_\nu }B(M,z)N(M,z)𝑑M.$$
(12)
The lower limit of the mass function integral is such as to correspond to the limiting flux from a cluster with mass $`M`$, which we take to be $`30`$mJy, the flux limit reachable in a one year observation. To evaluate this limiting mass, a binary function $`B(M,z)`$ is introduced. $`B(M,z)=1`$ if the flux corresponding to a given mass (and redshift) is greater than the limiting flux; otherwise, $`B(M,z)=0`$.

The predicted number of detectable clusters with mass $`M`$ at redshift $`z`$ is proportional to the MF evaluated at these parameters. This depends on the integrated Comptonization parameter along all lines of sight to the cluster. Consequently, the arguments presented in § 2 are relevant also in this case. In figure 7 the predicted cumulative number counts in models 1-5 are shown. A strong relation between the MF normalization and the cluster counts is clearly manifested. It may also be inferred from the figure that the largest contribution to the counts comes from clusters lying at redshifts $`0.4`$. Since the redshift distribution of clusters cannot be determined from S-Z measurements, the most relevant quantity is indeed the cumulative cluster counts at low redshifts. Results of the ‘cross’ calculations are presented in figure 8. The curves in figure 8 resemble those in figure 3 in the sense that the differences between the values represented by the ‘mismatched’ and ‘correct’ curves increase farther away from the diagonal. The relative differences between the properly and improperly calculated numbers span a range of $`1070\%`$ at the lowest redshifts, corresponding to the maximal cluster counts that would be detected in an all-sky S-Z survey.

Although not observable, the larger differences exhibited at higher redshift reflect the higher sensitivity of the MF to $`\sigma _8`$ at the high-mass end. At such high redshifts only the most massive clusters would be detected, owing to their larger fluxes, and therefore any change in the normalization that does not match the TMR used to evaluate the flux, would result in larger deviations of the counts with respect to a model employing a specific TMR and its corresponding normalization. A comparison between the results illustrated in figures 3 and 8 suggests that an inconsistent choice of $`\sigma _8`$ and the TMR results in a rather pronounced over- or under-estimation of the power spectrum, and a milder (but significant) mis-estimation in the cumulative number counts, in particular at the lowest redshifts. This difference is clearly due to the steeper (gas) temperature dependence of the power ($`T_e^2`$) as compared to the corresponding linear dependence of the flux.

## 5 Conclusion

Predicted profiles and levels of the angular power spectrum of the S-Z effect and of cluster number counts are strongly affected by modeling details and the particular choice of parameter values which explain the large variance in the values of these quantities in the literature. In this paper we focused on the tight dependence between the TMR and $`\sigma _8`$. We demonstrated that selecting these independently is generally not self-consistent and leads to considerable mis-estimation of the power spectrum and cluster counts. This can be is avoided when $`\sigma _8`$ is determined from CMB and large scale structure surveys that do not involve cluster TMRs.

Acknowledgement: This research has been supported by the Israeli Science Foundation grant 729$`\backslash `$00-03 at Tel-Aviv University.


text:
# A large sample of spectroscopic redshifts in the ACS-GOODS region of the HDF-N

## 1. Introduction

The Hubble Deep Field-North (HDF-N; Williams et al. 1996; Ferguson, Dickinson, & Williams 2000) remains the single most intensively studied region on the sky. In addition to the defining HST WFPC2 observations of the central 5.3 arcmin2 area (the HDF-N proper), the field was also the target of the deepest X-ray exposure to date, the 2 Ms Chandra Deep Field-North (CDF-N) observation (Alexander et al. 2003; Barger et al. 2003), which covers about 460 arcmin2. Even wider areas have been covered with ultradeep ground-based optical and near-infrared imaging (Capak et al. 2003 and references therein) and with very deep 20 cm radio observations with the VLA (Richards 2000).

Most recently, a roughly 160 arcmin2 region, covering the HDF-N proper and lying mostly within the CDF-N, was observed with the ACS camera on HST in four passbands (F435W, F606W, F775W, F850LP) as part of the GOODS HST Treasury program (hereafter, ACS-GOODS; Giavalisco et al. 2003). This region will also be the target of the deepest SIRTF observations, as part of the GOODS SIRTF Legacy program (M. Dickinson, PI). While not quite as deep as the HDF-N proper, the ACS-GOODS survey provides a very deep, high spatial resolution image of a moderately large area of sky.

While photometric redshift surveys can cover large areas—avoiding the problems of cosmic variance, which can be significant in areas the size of the ACS-GOODS region—and are useful for determining the evolution of the luminosity function and the universal star formation history (see Capak et al. 2004 for a photometric redshift analysis of the 600 arcmin2 Suprime-Cam field around the HDF-N), spectroscopic redshift surveys are needed to determine the evolution of clustering and the environmental dependences of galaxy properties, such as their X-ray, submillimeter, and radio emission. Spectroscopic redshifts are also required for determining the distribution of spectral types, which may be combined with galaxy morphologies from the ACS-GOODS observations, and for determining line luminosities, which provide an alternative way of approaching the star formation history. Finally, spectroscopic redshifts may be used to refine photometric redshift estimates and to test what fraction of photometric redshifts are in error in a given field. Some classes of sources, such as broad-line AGNs or sources that have very strong emission lines, frequently have bad photometric redshifts (e.g., see Barger et al. 2003), and spectroscopic measurements can be used to determine how common such sources are. The present paper, and a parallel paper by Wirth et al. (2004), describe two efforts to spectroscopically identify large, well-defined samples in the ACS-GOODS region.

The region around the HDF-N was intensively observed spectroscopically by a number of groups using the Low-Resolution Imaging Spectrograph (LRIS; Oke et al. 1995) on the Keck 10 m telescopes. This was a labor-intensive effort, since typically only $`2030`$ sources could be observed in each mask, and $`1`$ hr observations were required. However, spectra were obtained for 671 sources (see the compilation of Cohen et al. 2000 for full referencing). Analyses of various aspects of this sample are given in Cohen (2001) and Cohen (2002).

The recent implementation of the Deep Extragalactic Imaging Multi-Object Spectrograph (DEIMOS; Faber et al. 2003) on the Keck II 10 m telescope has greatly increased the speed with which such observations may be carried out. DEIMOS can observe around 100 or more sources per mask, and its higher resolution and quantum efficiency make identifications more straightforward. The long axis of the field-of-view of the instrument is well matched to the 18 arcminute long axis of the ACS-GOODS field, and most of the ACS-GOODS field can be covered in two DEIMOS pointings. With DEIMOS it should be possible to identify nearly all of the sources with optical AB magnitudes brighter than 24 in the red through the entire ACS-GOODS area.

Recognizing this, two parallel efforts were begun in Spring 2003 to map spectroscopically the galaxies in the ACS-GOODS area with DEIMOS. A team led by Keck astronomers (hereafter, the Keck Team Redshift Survey or KTRS) focused purely on an $`R`$ magnitude selected sample in the ACS-GOODS region, using observing and reduction techniques developed for the DEEP-2 project (Davis et al. 2003). This sample is described in the paper by Wirth et al. (2004). Our own sample was embedded within observations targeted at high-redshift galaxies and X-ray and radio selected galaxies in the wider regions, as described in Hu et al. (2004), Barger et al. (2003), and Cowie et al. (2004). Free regions of the masks that lay within the ACS-GOODS area were filled with magnitude selected samples chosen to have $`z^{}<23.5`$, $`R<24`$, or $`B<24.5`$. Some fainter sources were also included where no suitable brighter targets could be obtained. Combining our DEIMOS data with our LRIS data from earlier runs, we now have spectroscopic identifications for 787 sources in the field with $`z^{}<24`$, $`R<24.5`$, or $`B<25`$. Combining this sample with data from the literature (Cohen et al. 2000, hereafter C00; Dawson et al. 2001, hereafter D01; Steidel et al. 2003, hereafter S03) increases the identified sample to 1180.

In the present paper we describe our spectroscopic sample and compare it with other spectroscopic and photometric redshift samples, focusing on our sample’s completeness. We then analyze our $`z^{}<23.5`$ selected sample in detail to look at how the colors and the star formation and AGN signatures of the galaxies depend on their density environment over the $`z=01.5`$ redshift range. We take $`H_0=65h_{65}`$ km s-1 Mpc-1 and use an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=\frac{1}{3}`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{2}{3}`$ cosmology.

## 2. Observations

Since the ACS-GOODS observations were in progress at the time of our mask designs, the astrometric and photometric properties of the sample were taken from the ground-based catalog of Capak et al. (2003). In the present paper we use the astrometric positions from the ACS-GOODS catalog, which were kindly provided by Mauro Giavalisco, but we continue to use the photometric magnitudes from Capak et al. We chose the DEIMOS sample from galaxies in the area with $`z^{}<23.5`$, supplemented by galaxies with $`R<24`$ or with $`B<24.5`$. Where no primary target could be fitted into a slit mask, we included sources up to half a magnitude fainter. As noted above, many of the sources already had redshifts in the literature or from our own previous LRIS spectroscopy. In planning our DEIMOS observations, we prioritized unobserved sources over those with existing redshifts. However, where no unobserved target was available, we included sources with known redshifts, since one of our primary goals was to obtain as uniform a set of spectra for the sources as possible.

The new spectroscopic observations were obtained with DEIMOS on Keck II the nights of UT 2003 January 29–30, March 27, April 25–27, and May 27. The observations were made with the 600 lines per mm grating, giving a resolution of $`3.5`$ Å and a wavelength coverage of $`5300`$ Å. The spectra were centered at an average wavelength of $`7200`$ Å, though the exact wavelength range for each spectrum depends on the slit position. Each $`1`$ hr exposure was broken into three subsets, with the sources stepped along the slit by $`1.5^{\prime \prime }`$ in each direction. The spectra were reduced in the same way as previous LRIS spectra (see Cowie et al. 1996) by forming a primary sky subtraction from the median of the dithered images, registering and combining the images with a cosmic ray rejection filter, removing geometric distortion, and then applying a profile weighted extraction to obtain the spectrum. The wavelength calibration was made using a polynomial fit to the night sky spectrum.

Each spectrum was individually inspected, and a redshift was measured only where a robust identification was possible. The high resolution of the DEIMOS observations greatly simplifies the identification of sources dominated by single strong emission lines since it resolves the doublet structure of the \[OII\] 3727 Å line. As discussed below, most of the magnitude-limited sample sources could be identified. The incompleteness is largest at the faint end, but in a small number of cases (about $`510`$%, depending on the mask) the spectra were problematic in some way (e.g., the sources were at the edge of a CCD chip or in the heavily distorted and vignetted regions at the edge of the mask); these are present at all magnitudes. Sources that were observed but could not be identified (independent of the cause) are retained in our main table (Table 1).

In Table 1 we list the 905 sources that we observed with either DEIMOS or LRIS and have spectra for, from any part of the ACS-GOODS area, and satisfying the magnitude constraints $`z^{}<24`$, $`R<24.5`$, or $`B<25`$. Table 1 is ordered by $`R`$ magnitude and gives the right ascension and declination in decimal degrees (from the ACS-GOODS catalog), the $`z^{}`$, $`R`$, and $`B`$ magnitudes (from the ground-based data of Capak et al. 2003), and the measured redshift. The magnitudes are $`3^{\prime \prime }`$ diameter aperture magnitudes corrected to total magnitudes. Where a source is saturated or otherwise problematic, the magnitudes are omitted. In the redshift column, sources which were observed but not identified are shown as “obs”. Of the sources in the table, 787 are identified, comprising 704 galaxies and 83 stars. We refer to the sample in Table 1 as the “Hawaii” sample.

In Table 2 we combined the identified sources in the “Hawaii” sample with redshifts from the literature to form a more complete table. Including the data from C00, D01, and S03, we have redshifts or stellar identifications for 1180 sources. Table 2 gives the right ascension and declination in decimal degrees from the ACS-GOODS catalog, the $`HK^{}`$, $`z^{}`$, $`I`$, $`R`$, $`V`$, $`B`$, and $`U`$ magnitudes from Capak et al. (2003), the redshift and its source (H=Hawaii, C00, D01, or S03), the photometric redshift from Capak et al. (2004), and the odds assigned to it (see § 3.2). Sources in the sample that are compact in the ACS-GOODS images and are classified as stars from the empirical star-galaxy separation criterion $`(VI)2.0(IHK^{})=1.1`$ given in Barger et al. (1999) are assigned as stars in the photometric redshift list. We refer to the sample in Table 2 as the “total” sample.

There are a very small number of discrepant sources, where different groups have assigned different redshifts. In only one instance does a Hawaii DEIMOS redshift differ from a Hawaii LRIS redshift. In this case, the DEIMOS redshift also turns out to be inconsistent with other groups’ measurements (see Table 3), so we adopt the LRIS redshift in our “Hawaii” sample.

## 3. Tests

### 3.1. Comparison with other catalogs

In order to compare the “Hawaii” sample with the KTRS sample of Wirth et al. (2003) and the literature samples (C00, D01, and S03), we first combined the KTRS and literature samples to form the “other” sample. In the small number of cases where there were discrepancies, we somewhat arbitrarily resolved these in favor of KTRS, then C00, then D01, and then S03. There are 552 overlapping identifications between the “Hawaii” sample and the “other” sample. Of these, 512 are galaxies and 40 are stars. All of the star identifications are consistent in the two samples. In Figure 3.1 we compare the “Hawaii” galaxy redshifts with the “other” galaxy redshifts and find that nearly all of these are also consistent. Considering a redshift to be discrepant if it deviates by more than 0.01, we find that only seven of the overlap galaxies are discrepant, in addition to the one internally inconsistent galaxy discussed in § 2; the latter source is not shown in Fig. 3.1 because we adopted our LRIS redshift instead of our DEIMOS redshift. These eight galaxies give an upper bound of 1.4% of sources where the identifications might be problematic in the “Hawaii” sample; they are summarized and briefly described in Table 3.

### 3.2. Photometric redshift comparison

We next compared the “total” sample of redshifts (from the Hawaii observations and the literature) with the photometric redshift catalog of Capak et al. (2004). The photometric redshift estimates are based on ultradeep imaging in seven colors from $`U`$ to $`HK^{}`$ (Capak et al. 2003) and were computed using the Bayesian code of Benítez (2000). This code assigns odds that the redshift lies close to the estimated value. We only use those cases where the odds lie above 90%. The imaging data also saturate at bright magnitudes, so we restrict the comparison to sources with $`R>20`$. This gives a sample of 1078 sources with both spectroscopic and photometric redshifts, which we compare in Figure 3.2. Fourteen of the sources are broad-line AGNs, where the photometric estimates may be poorer since the templates do not properly model such sources. We have distinguished these sources in Figure 3.2 with larger solid squares. 97% of the photometric redshifts agree to within a multiplicative factor of 1.3 with the spectrosopic redshifts. This is consistent with the expectation from the odds assigned to the photometric redshifts. The agreement is independent of magnitude over the $`R=2024`$ range.

We may also use the photometric redshifts to test whether there are redshift intervals where the spectroscopic identifications are substantially incomplete. In Figure 3.2 we compare for three magnitude bins the histogram (dotted line) of the spectroscopic redshifts (from the “total” sample) with the histogram (dashed line) of the photometric redshifts. In the $`R=2022`$ and $`R=2223`$ bins, the shapes of the two histograms are similar, and an appropriate renormalization (solid line) produces close agreement between the two distributions. However, in the $`R=2324`$ interval, a higher fraction of sources are expected to lie at $`z>1.5`$ on the basis of the photometric redshifts than are spectroscopically observed at such redshifts. This is the well-known spectroscopic “desert”, where the \[OII\] 3727 Å line has moved out of the optical window, while the ultraviolet signatures have not yet entered.

### 3.3. Completeness

We next tested the fractional completeness of the “Hawaii” DEIMOS spectroscopic identifications versus magnitude. The results, which should be typical of what can be achieved with 1 hour exposures on this instrument, are given in Figure 3.2. Below $`R=23`$, nearly all of the observed sources are identified, except in a very small fraction of cases where there were problems with the spectra. The completeness begins to drop off beyond $`R=23`$, and by $`R=24`$, it has fallen to about 60%. Some part of this may be a consequence of there being a higher fraction of $`z>1.5`$ sources at these fainter magnitudes, since such sources in the spectroscopic desert are hard to identify. The photometric redshift estimates shown in Figure 3.2 predict that 13% of the sources in the $`R=23.7524.25`$ interval should lie between $`z=1.5`$ and $`z=2`$, while only 5 sources are spectroscopically identified in this redshift interval. This suggests that about a third of the incompleteness is caused by redshift evolution moving the sources into difficult redshift ranges and that the remaining incompleteness is primarily caused by the lower S/N in the spectra of the fainter sources.

### 3.4. Fraction Observed

The ACS-GOODS region has a complex morphology due to the tiling process (see Fig. 3.3). To eliminate the more poorly covered regions, from now on we restrict our analysis to the rectangular 145 arcmin2 area shown in Figure 3.3; hereafter we refer to this as the “restricted” field. The coordinates and size of this area are given in the Figure 3.3 caption. The area contains 3460 sources that satisfy the primary magnitude selection criteria ($`z^{}<23.5`$, $`R<24`$, or $`B<24.5`$).

Figure 3.4 shows the fractional identifications versus $`R`$ and $`z^{}`$ magnitude for the “total” sample in the restricted field. Figure 3.4 shows the same versus position along the long axis of the rectangle. More than a third of the sources have been identified to $`R=24`$ and $`z^{}=23.5`$, with the fractions being higher at the brighter magnitudes. The “total” sample is rather strongly concentrated around the HDF-N proper (see Fig. 3.4).

In order to show the current completeness of all spectrscopic data on the field we have combined the present data with the KTRS sample of Wirth et al. (2003). In the restricted field this raises the number of identified sources to slightly more than 1800, or more than half the sources to $`R=24`$ (see Fig. 3.4). The inclusion of the KTRS data also substantially smooths the spatial distribution (see Fig. 3.4).

## 4. Discussion

### 4.1. Redshift distribution

Figure 4.1 shows the redshift-magnitude diagrams for the $`R<24`$ and $`z^{}<23.5`$ selected sources in the “total” sample in the restricted field. At magnitudes $`R<23`$ or $`z^{}<22.5`$, nearly all of the sources at redshifts higher than $`z=1.5`$ are broad-line AGNs. At fainter magnitudes, the more normal galaxy population stretches beyond $`z=1.5`$ into the redshift desert (see § 3.3), and the truncation of the redshift distribution at $`z=1.5`$ is clearly seen. A small number of galaxies have measured redshifts above $`z=2`$. A substantial fraction of the $`z>2`$ sources have X-ray counterparts (large open squares) and may have substantial AGN contributions to their light, but many do not (see Barger et al. 2003).

The well-known “velocity sheets” (C00) that are a consequence of the large scale clustering can be seen in the redshift-magnitude diagrams. These are more clearly visible in the pie diagrams of Figure 4.1, which show the distributions (a) parallel and (b) perpendicular to the long axis of the ACS-GOODS rectangle. The most prominent of the sheets lie at $`z=0.85`$ and $`z=1.01`$. The sheets extend most of the way along the long axis (the drop-off at the ends is a consequence of the higher incompleteness of the observations at these positions—see Figure 3.4), but the $`z=1.01`$ sheet is primarily found on the eastern side of the rectangle. The X-ray source positions (large open squares) and broad-line AGN positions (large solid squares) are shown on the pie diagrams. As has been previously noted, these also show velocity sheet structures (Barger et al. 2002, 2003; Gilli et al. 2003). We shall return to the question of whether they are more concentrated into velocity sheets than the normal galaxies in § 4.3.

### 4.2. Galaxy colors versus redshift

Figure 4.2 shows $`Rz^{}`$ color versus redshift for the $`z^{}<23.5`$ “total” sample in the restricted field. The upper bound of the distribution matches extremely well to the expected color of an elliptical galaxy. Apparently, very few galaxies are sufficiently reddened to lie above this envelope. There are only six such sources, three of which are galaxy pairs and radio sources (solid squares), suggesting they may be dusty mergers. It is unclear why the other three sources lie at these colors.

Because of the extensive color information available (Table 2), we may analyze the galaxy colors in a more model-independent fashion by interpolating to form the rest-frame colors at each redshift. In Figure 4.2 we show the rest-frame $`28008000`$ Å color versus redshift. The upper bound matches the color of an elliptical galaxy and is nearly invariant from $`z=01`$. Beyond this redshift, the $`z^{}`$ selection becomes biased against elliptical galaxies as the 4000 Å break enters the $`z^{}`$ band. The bottom of the distribution corresponds to irregulars, star formers, and broad-line AGNs (the latter are denoted by large solid squares).

The type selection versus absolute magnitude is illustrated in Figure 4.2, where we show the rest-frame absolute (a) 8000 Å and (b) 2800 Å magnitudes versus redshift. For Figure 4.2a we use $`z^{}<23.5`$, but we implicitly have a second selection since we need to interpolate between the $`HK^{}`$ magnitudes and the $`z^{}`$ magnitudes to determine the 8000 Å magnitudes at high redshifts. To formalize this, we also limit the sample to $`HK^{}<22.5`$. This $`HK^{}`$ selection is illustrated with a dashed curve computed for a flat-spectrum source. Above this curve, all sources should be included, if we assume that all sources are redder than flat $`f_\nu `$. However, the $`z^{}`$ selection means that we will omit redder sources at the higher redshifts and fainter magnitudes. We illustrate this for the case of an elliptical galaxy (solid curve) and a spiral galaxy (dashed curve). At $`z=1.2`$ we will omit ellipticals fainter than about $`22`$ in the rest-frame 8000 Å band. For Figure 4.2b we use $`R<24`$. Since this is a red-selected sample, we again illustrate the selection threshold for a flat $`f_\nu `$ spectrum. All sources above this line should be included.

In Figures 4.2a and 4.2b, we also show the positions of the sources with broad emission lines in their spectra (large solid squares) and the positions of the sources with high X-ray luminosities ($`L_X>10^{42}`$ ergs s -1; large open squares). Most of the high ultraviolet luminosity sources fall in these categories and may have substantial AGN contributions. Previous analyses have not been able to distinguish between these sources and galaxies where the ultraviolet light is dominated by star formation. Further discussion of the evolution of the light density and luminosity functions with redshift may be found in Capak et al. (2004).

### 4.3. X-ray properties versus environment

A large fraction of the most luminous galaxies harbor AGNs. For all galaxies with $`M_{8000\mathrm{\AA }}<21`$ in the $`z=01`$ range, based on either spectroscopic or photometric redshifts, the fraction with $`L_X>10^{42}`$ ergs s -1 is 6%, while for $`M_{8000\mathrm{\AA }}<22`$, it is 15%, in agreement with previous estimates (e.g., Barger et al. 2001). Conversely, nearly all of the luminous X-ray sources lie in optically luminous galaxies. Of the sources with $`L_X>10^{42}`$ ergs s -1, 82% lie in galaxies with $`M_{8000\mathrm{\AA }}<21`$ in the $`z=01.2`$ redshift range, where lower optical luminosity sources would still be seen. Neither result shows any strong redshift dependence.

Barger et al. (2002, 2003) and Gilli et al. (2003) noted that the X-ray sources are concentrated into velocity sheets. This has been taken to imply that the X-ray activity is found preferentially in higher density regions. However, it is not clear that the X-ray sources are more concentrated into these regions than the luminous field galaxies that contain them.

In order to test this, we estimated a simple neighborhood density for each galaxy by measuring the number density of $`M_{8000\mathrm{\AA }}<21`$ galaxies in a redshift interval of $`z=0.01`$ about the source, averaged through the ACS-GOODS rectangle. The density was computed using only the spectroscopically identified sources and then corrected to a total number density by multiplying by the ratio of photometric to spectroscopic sources in the magnitude interval at that redshift. This density estimate is somewhwat crude since it assumes the sheets are uniform structures over the rectangle at all redshifts and also uses a redshift dependent window to select the density, but it should be adequate for the present purposes. We then used a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test to compare the density environment of X-ray sources with $`M_{8000\mathrm{\AA }}<21`$ and $`L_X>10^{42}`$ ergs s -1 with field sources with $`M_{8000\mathrm{\AA }}<21`$. The two distributions are shown in Figure 4.3. The distribution of the X-ray sources is is not significantly different from that of the field sources at the 95% confidence level, and the two distributions could be consistent. It appears that there is no preference for the luminous X-ray sources to lie in higher density environments.

Support was provided by NASA through grants HST-GO-09425.03-A (L. L. C.) and HST-GO-09425.30-A (A. J. B.) from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Incorporated, under NASA contract NAS5-26555. We also gratefully acknowledge support from NSF grants AST-0084816 (L. L. C.), AST-0084847 (A. J. B.), and AST-0071208 (E. M. H.), NSF CAREER award AST-0239425 (A. J. B.), NASA grants DF1-2001X (L. L. C.) and GO2-3187B (L. L. C.), the University of Wisconsin Research Committee with funds granted by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (A. J. B.), the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (A. J. B.), and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation (A. J. B.)