--- abstract: | We present an optically-selected cluster catalog from the Hyper Suprime-Cam (HSC) Subaru Strategic Program. The HSC images are sufficiently deep to detect cluster member galaxies down to $M_*\sim 10^{10.2}M_\odot$ even at $z\sim 1$, allowing a reliable cluster detection at such high redshifts. We apply the CAMIRA algorithm to the HSC Wide S16A dataset covering $\sim 232$ deg$^2$ to construct a catalog of 1921 clusters at redshift $0.1<z<1.1$ and richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>15$ that roughly corresponds to $M_{\rm 200m}\gtrsim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$. We confirm good cluster photometric redshift performance, with the bias and scatter in $\Delta z/(1+z)$ being better than 0.005 and 0.01 over most of the redshift range, respectively. We compare our cluster catalog with large X-ray cluster catalogs from XXL and XMM-LSS surveys and find good correlation between richness and X-ray properties. We also study the miscentering effect from the distribution of offsets between optical and X-ray cluster centers. We confirm the high ($>0.9$) completeness and purity for high mass clusters by analyzing mock galaxy catalogs. author: - 'Masamune <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Oguri</span>' - 'Yen-Ting <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Lin</span>' - 'Sheng-Chieh <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Lin</span>' - | \ Atsushi J. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Nishizawa</span> - 'Anupreeta <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">More</span>' - 'Surhud <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">More</span>' - | \ Bau-Ching <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hsieh</span> - 'Elinor <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Medezinski</span>' - 'Hironao <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Miyatake</span>' - | \ Hung-Yu <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Jian</span> - 'Lihwai <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Lin</span>' - 'Masahiro <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Takada</span>' - 'Nobuhiro <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Okabe</span>' - | \ Joshua S. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Speagle</span> - 'Jean <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Coupon</span>' - 'Alexie <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Leauthaud</span>' - | \ Robert H. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Lupton</span> - 'Satoshi <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Miyazaki</span>' - 'Paul A. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Price</span>' - | \ Masayuki <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Tanaka</span> - 'I-Non <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Chiu</span>' - 'Yutaka <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Komiyama</span>' - | \ Yuki <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Okura</span> - 'Manobu M. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Tanaka</span>' - 'Tomonori <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usuda</span>' title: 'An optically-selected cluster catalog at redshift $0.1<z<1.1$ from the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program S16A data' --- Introduction ============ Clusters of galaxies are dominated by dark matter, which makes them a useful site for cosmological studies. For example, the abundance of massive clusters and its time evolution, which can well be predicted by $N$-body simulations, are known to be a sensitive probe of cosmological parameters [e.g., @allen11; @weinberg13]. Detailed studies of dark matter distributions in clusters basically support the so-called cold dark matter paradigm at the non-linear scale [e.g, @oguri10; @oguri12; @okabe10; @okabe13; @umetsu11; @umetsu16; @niikura15]. In addition, clusters of galaxies play an essential role in understanding galaxy formation physics given a possible large environmental effect on galaxy formation and evolution [e.g., @renzini06; @kravtsov12]. Clusters can be identified in various wavelengths, including optical, X-ray, and radio/mm/submm via the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich [SZ; @sunyaev72] effect. While there are advantages and disadvantages for each method, the recent development of wide-field optical imaging surveys makes surveys of clusters in optical particularly powerful, because they take wide-field images with multi-bands, which is crucial both in selecting clusters of galaxies efficiently from the enhancement of galaxy number densities as well as deriving photometric redshifts of clusters [e.g., @gladders00]. Indeed, large samples of optically-selected clusters have been constructed in Sloan Digital Sky Survey [@koester07; @hao10; @szabo11; @wen12; @rykoff14; @oguri14], the Red-Sequence Cluster Survey [@gladders05], the Canada-France-Hawaii-Telescope Legacy Survey [@milkeraitis10; @ford14; @licitra16], the Blanco Cosmology Survey [@bleem15], and the Dark Energy Survey Science Verification Data [DES; @rykoff16]. Because of the depth and wavelength coverage of these optical surveys, the redshift range of most of these clusters are restricted to $z\lesssim thorton@example.net. Attempts to find clusters at higher redshifts have also been made using infrared data, although with generally smaller area [e.g., @goto08; @wilson09; @andreon09; @gettings12; @rettura14]. The Hyper Suprime-Cam [HSC; @miyazaki12; @miyazaki15] is a new wide-field optical imager installed on the Subaru 8.2-meter telescope. The HSC Subaru Strategic Program (hereafter the HSC Survey) is an ongoing wide-field optical imaging survey [@aihara17]. It consists of three layers (Wide, Deep, and Ultradeep), and the Wide layer is planned to observe the total sky area of $\sim1400$ deg$^2$ with five broadband filters ($grizy$). With its unique combination of area and depth ($i_{\rm lim}\sim 26$ at $5\sigma$), the HSC Wide layer is expected to revolutionize the optically-selected cluster search by constructing a large sample of massive clusters at $z\sim 1$ and beyond. In this paper, we construct a new optically-selected cluster catalog from the first two years of observation of the HSC Survey, using the CAMIRA (Cluster finding Algorithm based on Multi-band Identification of Red-sequence gAlaxies) algorithm [@oguri14]. We construct a catalog of 1921 clusters with richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>15$ and the redshift range $0.1<z<1.1$. The catalog is compared with spectroscopic and X-ray data as well as mock galaxy catalogs to check its validity. This paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:data\] we describe the HSC data and the cluster finding algorithm used in the paper. Section \[sec:catalog\] presents the cluster catalog and discusses the accuracy of photometric redshifts of the clusters. We compare the HSC cluster catalog with the SDSS CAMIRA cluster catalog in Section \[sec:sdss\], and X-ray cluster catalogs in Section \[sec:xray\]. We present an analysis of mock galaxy catalogs in Section \[sec:mock\]. We summarize our results in Section \[sec:summary\]. Throughout the paper we assume a flat $\Lambda$-dominated cold dark matter model with $\Omega_M=0.28$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.72$, $h=0.7$, $\Omega_b=0.044$, $n_s=0.96$, and $\sigma_8=0.82$. Magnitudes in this paper are in the AB magnitude system, and are corrected for Galactic extinction [@schlegel98]. Data and Method {#sec:data} =============== HSC Wide Data {#sec:hscdata} ------------- In this paper we use the S16A internal data release of the HSC Survey, which was released in 2016 August. The S16A release contains imaging data taken between 2014 March and 2016 April, containing 174 deg$^2$ of the HSC Wide data taken in all five broadbands at full depth. The area that covers all five broadbands but with non full depth exceeds 200 deg$^2$. The HSC data are reduced with the HSC Pipeline, hscPipe [@bosch17], which is based on the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope pipeline [@ivezic08; @axelrod15; @juric15]. The Pan-STARRS1 data [@tonry12; @schlafly12; @magnier13] are also used for astrometric and photometric calibrations. We create an input galaxy catalog from the HSC database. We select galaxies that were observed in all five broadbands, by imposing cuts in the number of visits for each object using <span>countinputs</span> parameter, which indicates the number of images used to create a coadd image for each galaxy. Specifically we set <span>countinputs</span>$\geq 2$ for $gr$-bands and <span>countinputs</span>$\geq 4$ for $izy$-bands. While this condition is a more relaxed condition than the nominal definition of the full depth for the HSC Wide Survey (<span>countinputs</span>$= 4$ for $gr$-bands and <span>countinputs</span>$=6$ for $izy$-bands), we adopt this condition to avoid gaps in the galaxy distribution due to CCD gaps. We only use galaxies with $z$-band <span>cmodel</span> magnitude brighter than $z=24$, its error smaller than $0.1$, and $i$-band star-galaxy separation parameter <span>classification\_extendedness</span>$=1$. We use $z$-band for the detection magnitude, rather than $i$-band as used in the SDSS CAMIRA cluster catalog, as it is better suited for galaxies at redshift around unity. The limiting magnitude of $z=24$ corresponds to more than $10\sigma$ detection significance for most of the area of interest, and hence the detection completeness is very close to unity. On the other hand, we use $i$-band star-galaxy separation because $i$-band images are on average taken in better seeing conditions with a median seeing size of $\sim 0\farcs6$ than the other bands, in order to allow accurate galaxy shape measurements for weak lensing analysis. In addition we place weak constraints on $ri$-bands as $r<26.5$ and $i<26$ mainly to remove artifacts. We also remove galaxies that can be affected by bad pixels or have poor photometric measurements, by rejecting objects with any of the following flags in any five broadbands; <span>flags\_pixel\_edge</span>, <span>flags\_pixel\_cr\_center</span>, <span>flags\_pixel\_interpolated\_center</span>, <span>cmodel\_flux\_flags</span>, and <span>parent\_flux\_convolved\_2\_0\_flags</span>. In addition we remove objects with the flag <span> centroid\_sdss\_flags</span> in $riz$-bands [@aihara17] We use <span>cmodel</span> magnitudes, which are magnitudes derived from light profile fitting, as "total" magnitudes of galaxies [@bosch17]. However, we find that photometry with the current version of hscPipe can be inaccurate in crowded regions such as cluster centers because of failure of the deblender in such regions. More specifically, although hscPipe successfully deblends galaxies in crowded regions, magnitudes of deblended galaxies in highly crowded regions are sometimes offset significantly. Given the critical importance of accurate colors for cluster finding, in this paper we adopt the following hybrid approach for galaxy photometry. We derive colors of individual galaxies using aperture photometry on the 'parent' (i.e., undeblended) image after the Point Spread Function (PSF) sizes are matched between five broadbands, because this aperture photometry provide accurate colors even for galaxies in crowded regions. We use the target PSF size of $1\farcs1$ and the aperture size of $1\farcs1$ in diameter (<span> parent\_mag\_convolved\_2\_0</span>). As stated above, we use <span>cmodel</span> magnitudes, which are galaxy magnitudes from light profile fitting, for total $z$-band magnitudes, and derive magnitudes in the other bands using the colors from the aperture photometry on PSF-matched images as described above in detail. The HSC database also provides a bright star mask. Masked areas are dependent on magnitudes of stars, and are chosen conservatively. As a result, about 10% of the area fall in the bright star mask. Here we do not apply the bright star mask to create our cluster catalog, although we also provide an HSC Wide cluster catalog constructed with the bright star mask in Appendix 1. The current version of the bright star mask contains an issue that affects cluster finding at low redshifts, which is discussed in Appendix 2. The input galaxy catalog contains 19,060,802 galaxies. Spectroscopic Data {#sec:specgal} ------------------ ![The number distribution of spectroscopic galaxies in the HSC Wide Survey as a function of spectroscopic redshift. The dotted line shows the distribution for all the spectroscopic galaxies. The solid line shows the distribution after the color cuts to select red-sequence galaxies (see the text for details). <span data-label="fig:hist_specz"></span>](fig1.eps){width="8cm"} As discussed in @oguri14, we need a calibration of red-sequence galaxy colors with spectroscopic galaxies in order to improve the accuracy of our algorithm. In fact, the HSC Survey overlaps with a number of spectroscopic surveys including SDSS DR12 [@alam15], DEEP2 DR4 [@newman13], PRIMUS DR1 [@coil11], VIPERS PDR1 [@garilli14], VVDS [@lefevre13], GAMA DR2 [@liske15], WiggleZ DR1 [@drinkwater10], zCOSMOS DR3 [@lilly09], UDSz [@bradshaw13; @mclure13], 3D-HST v4.1.5 [@momcheva16], and FMOS-COSMOS v1.0 [@silverman15]. We use these spectroscopic data for the calibration. First we cross match the spectroscopic catalogs with the HSC Wide S16A galaxy catalog constructed in Section \[sec:hscdata\] to obtain a sample of 171,255 galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts between $z=0.01$ and 1.4 and the redshift error smaller than 0.01. Since we are interested in red-sequence galaxies only, we apply additional color cuts to remove obvious blue galaxies and to select galaxies used for the calibration of the red-sequence colors. Specifically we adopt the following color cuts $$g-r> \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 0.398+2.9z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(z_{\rm spec} \leq 0.38), \\ 1.861-0.95z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(0.38 < z_{\rm spec} ), \end{array} \right. \label{eq:gr1}$$ $$r-i> \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 0.2+0.8z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(z_{\rm spec} \leq 0.369), \\ -0.169+1.8z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(0.369 < z_{\rm spec} \leq 0.75), \\ 1.481-0.4z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(0.75 < z_{\rm spec} ), \end{array} \right. \label{eq:ri1}$$ $$r-i<2-0.4z_{\rm spec},$$ $$i-z> \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 0.122+0.3z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(z_{\rm spec} \leq 0.76), \\ -1.132+1.95z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(0.76 < z_{\rm spec} \leq 0.96), \\ 0.164+0.6z_{\rm spec}\;\;\;(0.96 < z_{\rm spec} ), \end{array} \right. \label{eq:iz1}$$ $$i-z<0.5+0.5z_{\rm spec},$$ where $z_{\rm spec}$ denotes the spectroscopic redshift. We also restrict the $i$-band magnitude as $i>17$ because bright galaxies might be saturated in the HSC images. We note that these color cuts are meant for the rough selection of red-sequence galaxies and does not need to be strict as any outliers are clipped in the course of the calibration process [see @oguri14]. We also note that these color cuts are only for spectroscopic galaxies used for the calibration, i.e., we do not apply any color cuts for photometric galaxies used for cluster finding. ![Colors of spectroscopic galaxies as a function of redshift. For illustrative purpose, we plot a subsample of only 5% of all the spectroscopic galaxies. We show $g-r$ (<span>*upper left*</span>), $r-i$ (<span>*upper right*</span>), $i-z$ (<span>*lower left*</span>), and $z-y$ (<span> *lower right*</span>). Solid lines show our color cuts defined by equations (\[eq:gr1\]), (\[eq:ri1\]), and (\[eq:iz1\]).<span data-label="fig:zcol"></span>](fig2.eps){width="8cm"} We show the redshift distribution of the spectroscopic galaxies for the calibration in Figure \[fig:hist\_specz\], and distributions of colors of the spectroscopic galaxies as well as our color cuts in Figure \[fig:zcol\]. After the color cuts the number of spectroscopic galaxies reduces to 62,998. In fact we use only 90% of the spectroscopic galaxies after the color cuts for the calibration, and reserve the remaining 10% to make sure that we are not grossly overfitting the data. To check this point, we compute photometric redshifts of individual spectroscopic galaxies using our stellar population synthesis (SPS) model with calibrated colors and derive the bias and scatter of photometric redshifts of these spectroscopic galaxies. We find that the bias and scatter are similar between spectroscopic galaxies used for the calibration and those not used for the calibration. More specifically, we compute the bias and scatter of the residual $(z_{\rm photo}-z_{\rm spec})/(1+z_{\rm spec})$ for these spectroscopic galaxies with good SPS model fitting results ($\chi^2<20$ for 4 degree of freedom; this cut is only for checking the accuracy of photometric redshifts for individual galaxies presented in this subsection, and in cluster finding we do not apply this $\chi^2$ cut), and find the bias and scatter of $-0.0017$ and $0.021$ for galaxies used for the calibration, and $-0.0020$ and $0.021$ for galaxies not used for the calibration. Updates of the CAMIRA Algorithm {#sec:updates} ------------------------------- ![Spatial distribution of clusters. Filled points show the positions of HSC Wide S16A clusters presented in this paper. The planned footprint of the entire HSC Wide Survey is the region enclosed by dotted lines. We also show the spatial distribution of X-ray clusters used in Section \[sec:xray\] by crosses. <span data-label="fig:camira_radec"></span>](fig3.eps){width="8cm"} The detailed methodology of the CAMIRA algorithm was presented in @oguri14. In short, it fits all photometric galaxies with a SPS model of @bruzual03 to compute likelihoods of being red-sequence galaxies as a function of redshift. The model is calibrated using spectroscopic galaxies, which are used to derive residual colors of SPS model fitting as a function of wavelength and redshift (see also below). Using the likelihoods we define a non-integer "number parameter" for each galaxy as a function of redshift, such that the sum of number parameters reduces to richness. Using the number parameter, the three-dimensional richness map is constructed to locate cluster candidates from peaks in the richness map. In CAMIRA, richness describes the number of red member galaxies with stellar masses $M_*\gtrsim 10^{10.2}M_\odot$ and within a circular aperture with a radius $R\lesssim 1h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ in physical unit. In fact we use smooth filters for stellar masses, $F_M(M_*)\propto \exp[-(M_*/10^{13}M_\odot)^4-(10^{10.2}M_\odot/M_*)^4]$, and for spatial distributions, $F_R(R) \propto \Gamma[4,(R/R_0)^2]-(R/R_0)^4\exp[-(R/R_0)^2]$ with $R_0=0.8h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$, to compute richness. The spatial filter is a compensated filter such that the background level is automatically subtracted in deriving richness. We then identify a Brightest Cluster Galaxy (BCG) for each cluster candidate by selecting a high stellar mass galaxy near the richness peak, and refine richness, cluster photometric redshift, and the BCG, iteratively. Interested readers are referred to @oguri14 for more information. In this paper, we update the CAMIRA algorithm in several ways and also adjust model parameters, in order to produce better results in the HSC Survey which covers wider redshift range than the SDSS. First, while the central wavelength $\lambda_0$ used in the polynomial fitting of the residual magnitudes of the SPS model fitting [see equation 3 in @oguri14] was fixed to 5000Å, here we allow it to vary as a function of redshift, because the range of the rest frame wavelength covered by the HSC filters change significantly from $z=0$ to $z\sim 1$. Specifically, we assume the functional form of $$\lambda_0(z)=\lambda_{0,z=0}+\gamma z,$$ and adopt $\lambda_{0,z=0}=6400\AA$ and $\gamma=-2850\AA$. Second, we also include the redshift dependence of the model scatter $\sigma_{\rm resi}$. We do so by deriving $\sigma_{\rm resi}$ as a function of redshift using the spectroscopic galaxies within the redshift bin $\Delta z=0.13$. The centering parameter $\sigma_R$ in equation (19) of @oguri14 is modified from $\sigma_R=0.3h^{-1}$Mpc to $0.12h^{-1}$Mpc to reduce the cluster miscentering effect (see also Section \[sec:miscenter\]). Finally, we also update some parameters related to mask corrections, which takes account of the effect of small-scale gaps and holes seen in the input galaxy catalog [see @oguri14]. We use new parameter values of $\theta_{\rm mask}=0\farcm4$ (aperture size for creating a mask map from the input galaxy catalog), $f_{\rm mask,c}=0.7$, and $f_{\rm mask,b}=0.3$ (correction factors for the inner and outer parts of the spatial filter for cluster finding). ![Distribution of clusters in the richness-redshift plane. The cluster catalog is constructed in the redshift range $0.1<z_{\rm cl}<1.1$ and the richness range $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>15$.<span data-label="fig:camira_nz"></span>](fig4.eps){width="8cm"} Cluster Catalog {#sec:catalog} =============== Basic characteristics {#sec:basic} --------------------- We construct an HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog in the redshift range $0.1<z_{\rm cl}<1.1$, where $z_{\rm cl}$ denotes photometric redshifts of clusters. Cluster photometric redshifts are computed in the course of CAMIRA cluster finding by combining photometric redshifts of high-confidence cluster member galaxies [see @oguri14]. The upper limit of the redshift comes mainly from the lack of spectroscopic galaxies for the calibration, but it is also due to the limited wavelength coverage. The lower limit of the redshift is because large angular sizes of low-redshift clusters make cluster finding challenging, and member galaxies also tend to be too bright in HSC images. We select clusters with the mask-corrected richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ [see @oguri14 for the definition] higher than $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}=15$. The catalog contains 1921 clusters. In @oguri14, the richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ is further corrected for the incompleteness of detections of member galaxies. This was particularly important for SDSS in which our member galaxy selection (corresponding to $L\gtrsim 0.2L_*$) was incomplete at $z\gtrsim 0.3$ due to the shallow depth of SDSS images. In contrast, the HSC Wide Survey is deep enough to detect almost all member galaxies used for our cluster finding (including the non full-depth area we use in this paper), which again corresponds to $L\gtrsim 0.2L_*$, even at $z\sim 1.1$. Therefore in this paper we do not apply any richness correction due to member galaxy incompleteness (i.e., $\hat{N}_{\rm cor}=\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ in the notation of @oguri14). We show the spatial distribution of the HSC Wide S16A clusters in Figure \[fig:camira\_radec\], and the distribution in the richness-redshift plane in Figure \[fig:camira\_nz\]. The area of the cluster search region of HSC Wide S16A is estimated as $\sim 232$ deg$^2$. The area is larger than that of the full-color and full-depth region of 174 deg$^2$ for the HSC Wide S16A dataset because we use the region that does not reach full depth, as described in Section \[sec:hscdata\]. We show HSC images of the richest clusters in several different redshift ranges in Figure \[fig:cl\_comb\_wcap\]. ![image](fig5.eps){width="15cm"} Number density of clusters {#sec:numden} -------------------------- One way to infer the mass of a cluster catalog is to compare its number density with a number density of halos for a given cosmological model [e.g., @jimeno17]. We show the comoving number density of HSC Wide S16A clusters as a function of redshift in Figure \[fig:camira\_ncl\]. The number density declines slowly with increasing redshift, which is consistent with the DES Science Verification (SV) data redMaPPer cluster catalog [@rykoff16] and implies the redshift evolution of the mass threshold is not strong. In order to check this point further, we compute the predicted number densities of halos with constant mass threshold using the halo mass function of @tinker08. Here we adopt the mean overdensity mass $M_{\rm 200m}$ which is defined as the mass enclosed within a sphere of radius $r_{\rm 200m}$ within which the mean density is 200 times the mean matter density of the Universe. The comparison shown in Figure \[fig:camira\_ncl\] suggests that our richness threshold of $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>15$ roughly corresponds to the mass threshold of $M_{\rm 200m}\gtrsim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$. Performance of photometric redshifts ------------------------------------ Photometric redshifts of clusters, $z_{\rm cl}$, are derived on the course of cluster finding [see @oguri14]. In order to check the accuracy of cluster photometric redshifts, we cross-match the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog with the spectroscopic galaxy catalog (Section \[sec:specgal\]). We find that BCGs of 843 clusters have spectroscopic redshifts, $z_{\rm BCG,spec}$. Figure \[fig:comp\_clspec\] compares $z_{\rm cl}$ and $z_{\rm BCG,spec}$, which clearly shows that cluster photometric redshifts are quite accurate for the whole redshift range. To quantify the accuracy of cluster photometric redshifts, we compute the residual $(z_{\rm cl}-z_{\rm BCG,spec})/(1+z_{\rm BCG,spec})$ for all the clusters and define the bias $\delta_z$ and scatter $\sigma_z$ by average and standard deviation of the residual with $4\sigma$ clipping. We then define the outlier rate $f_{\rm out}$ as the fraction of galaxies that are removed by the $4\sigma$ clipping. Using all the galaxies, we find the bias $\delta_z=-0.0013$, the scatter $\sigma_z=0.0081$, and the outlier rate $f_{\rm out}=0.017$. In Figure \[fig:comp\_clspec\] we also show the bias $\delta_z$ and scatter $\sigma_z$ as a function of redshift, finding that the bias is $|\delta_z|<0.005$ and the scatter is $\sigma_z<0.01$ for most of the redshift range. This performance of cluster photometric redshifts is comparable to that of SDSS redMaPPer and CAMIRA clusters [@rykoff14; @oguri14] and better than that of DES SV redMaPPer clusters [@rykoff16]. We note that the availability of a large sample of spectroscopic galaxies from SDSS and other spectroscopic surveys (see Section \[sec:specgal\]) is an advantage of the HSC Survey over DES. However, as is clear from Figure \[fig:comp\_clspec\], there are not many spectroscopic galaxies at $z\gtrsim 0.8$, which suggests the importance of spectroscopic follow-up observations of those high-redshift clusters to test their reliability further. ![The comoving number density of HSC Wide S16A clusters as a function of cluster redshift (<span>*solid*</span>). The Poisson error is sufficiently small, $\sim 10$% in each bin. Dotted lines show the predicted number densities of halos with masses $M_{\rm 200m}>5\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_\odot$ (<span>*top*</span>), $10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$ (<span>*middle*</span>), and $2\times 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$ (<span>*bottom*</span>), which are computed using a halo mass function of @tinker08.<span data-label="fig:camira_ncl"></span>](fig6.eps){width="8cm"} ![<span>*Upper:*</span> The comparison between cluster photometric redshifts $z_{\rm cl}$ and spectroscopic redshifts of BCGs $z_{\rm BCG,spec}$. <span>*Lower:*</span> The bias $\delta_z$ (<span>*dashed*</span>) and scatter $\sigma_z$ (<span>*solid*</span>) of the residual $(z_{\rm cl}-z_{\rm BCG,spec})/(1+z_{\rm BCG,spec})$ as a function of redshift. <span data-label="fig:comp_clspec"></span>](fig7.eps){width="8cm"} Comparison with SDSS {#sec:sdss} ==================== ![Comparison of the CAMIRA richness in HSC, $\hat{N}_{\rm mem,HSC}$, with the incompleteness-corrected CAMIRA richness in SDSS, $\hat{N}_{\rm cor, SDSS}$. The fractional difference of these two richness is plotted as a function of cluster redshift from HSC, $z_{\rm cl, HSC}$. <span data-label="fig:check_dr8_dnz"></span>](fig8.eps){width="8cm"} Since the HSC data is much deeper than SDSS, it is expected that we can identify cluster member galaxies more reliably in HSC, down to the stellar mass limit for the richness calculation, $\sim 10^{10.2}M_*$, which roughly corresponds to the luminosity range of $L\gtrsim 0.2L_*$ recommended in @rykoff12. Due to the shallowness of the SDSS data, in @oguri14 we applied a richness correction factor $f_N(z)=\hat{N}_{\rm mem}/\hat{N}_{\rm cor}$ to account for the incompleteness of member galaxy detections. In contrast, as discussed in Section \[sec:basic\], in HSC we do not apply any correction for the member galaxy incompleteness simply because HSC data are deep enough to detect all the member galaxies of interest out to $z\sim 1.1$. Thus we compare the richness in SDSS and HSC to check the accuracy of the incompleteness correction. We cross match the CAMIRA SDSS catalog with the HSC Wide S16A catalog. Our matching criterion is that clusters whose physical transverse distance is within 1$h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ and the difference in cluster photometric redshifts is smaller than $0.1$. For the SDSS cluster catalog, we use an updated (v1.2) CAMIRA SDSS cluster catalog which slightly differs from the cluster catalog published in @oguri14. The updated CAMIRA SDSS catalog[^1] adopts the new centering parameters described in Section \[sec:updates\], and contains 83735 clusters in the redshift range $0.1<z_{\rm cl}<0.6$ and with the corrected richness $\hat{N}_{\rm cor}>20$. In Figure \[fig:check\_dr8\_dnz\], we compare the richness from HSC with the incompleteness-corrected richness from SDSS as a function of cluster redshift. While at low redshift these richness agree with each other, at higher redshift ($z\gtrsim 0.3$), where the richness correction is applied to SDSS richness, we find a systematic offset between these two richness, such that richness in HSC is systematically lower than richness in SDSS. This comparison suggests a possible systematic bias in the incompleteness correction in the CAMIRA SDSS cluster catalog, and hence highlights importance of using deep data to detect sufficiently faint cluster members for optical cluster finding. The deep photometric data are also important to study the redshift evolution of the luminosity function of cluster member galaxies. Comparison with X-ray cluster catalogs {#sec:xray} ====================================== X-ray catalogs {#sec:xxl} -------------- The footprint of the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog has a large overlap with two large area X-ray surveys, the XMM Large Scale Structure survey [XMM-LSS; @pierre04] and the XXL survey [@pierre16]. We adopt a sample of 52 X-ray bright clusters selected from the 11 deg$^2$ XMM-LSS survey region presented in @clerc14, and also a sample of 51 X-ray bright clusters from the $\sim 25$ deg$^2$ XXL North survey region presented in @pacaud16 and @giles16. For both the cluster catalogs, we use X-ray centroids, redshifts from the spectroscopy of member galaxies, X-ray temperatures $T_X$, and rest-frame \[0.5–2\] keV luminosities within $r_{500,{\rm MT}}$, $L_{X,500}$, where $r_{500,{\rm MT}}$ is the radius within which the mean matter density of the cluster becomes 500 times the critical density of the Universe at the cluster redshift with the corresponding mass $M_{500}$ estimated from a mass-temperature relation. In the XXL survey, X-ray temperatures $T_X$ are computed within a fixed aperture of 300 kpc. These two cluster catalogs have some overlap, and in this paper we use values from the XXL catalog when a cluster is included on both the XXL and XMM-LSS catalogs, because the XXL survey is an extension of the XMM-LSS survey. In addition, we remove 4 XXL cluster located at ${\rm Dec}<-6.6$ as the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog does not cover that area (see Figure \[fig:camira\_radec\]). By combining these two X-ray cluster catalogs, we construct a sample of 77 X-ray bright clusters which are used for characterizing the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog. The spatial distribution of these X-ray clusters is shown in Figure \[fig:camira\_radec\]. Correlation of richness with X-ray properties --------------------------------------------- ![Comparison between richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and X-ray temperature $T_X$ for XXL (<span>*filled triangles*</span>) and XMM-LSS (<span> *open squares*</span>) clusters. The solid and dashed lines show the best-fit richness-temperature relation and the range of $\pm 1\sigma$ intrinsic scatter. The lower panel shows the residual of fitting as a function of redshift. <span data-label="fig:check_tx"></span>](fig9.eps){width="8cm"} ![Same as Figure \[fig:check\_tx\], except that the comparison between richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and evolution-corrected X-ray luminosity $\left[E(z)\right]^{-1}L_{X,500}$ is shown. <span data-label="fig:check_lx"></span>](fig10.eps){width="8cm"} The comparison between the richness and X-ray properties such as the luminosity $L_{X,500}$ and temperature $T_X$ is useful. Because X-ray properties are more tightly correlated with cluster masses [but see also @andreon10; @andreon15], the correlation of richness with X-ray properties is often used as a proxy for the tightness of the correlation between the richness and the cluster mass [e.g., @rykoff12; @rozo14a; @oguri14; @wen15]. We cross match the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog with the X-ray cluster catalog constructed in Section \[sec:xxl\]. Again, we use a simple matching criterion that clusters whose physical transverse distance is within 1$h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ and redshift difference is smaller than $0.1$ are matched. When there are several matching candidates, we adopt clusters with the smallest transverse separation. Among the 77 X-ray bright clusters from XXL and XMM-LSS, 50 clusters are found to have counterparts in the HSC Wide S16A catalog. Some of the X-ray clusters have no counterpart in the HSC cluster catalog simply because their redshifts fall outside the redshift range of the HSC Wide S16A catalog (i.e., $z<0.1$ or $z>1.1$). There are other X-ray clusters that fall within the redshift range of the CAMIRA catalog but have no counterpart, which are used to estimate the completeness of the HSC cluster catalog (see Section \[sec:compl\]). Figure \[fig:check\_tx\] compares the richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ with X-ray temperature $T_X$ for the 50 clusters. There is a clear positive correlation between $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and $T_X$. To quantify the correlation, we fit the relation assuming the following power law model: $$\log\left(\frac{T_X}{{\rm keV}}\right)=a_T\log\left(\frac{\hat{N}_{\rm mem}}{30}\right)+b_T.$$ This model is same as that used in @oguri14 except that the pivot richness is changed to 30. We find the best-fit parameters of $a_T=0.50\pm0.12$ and $b_T=0.48\pm0.02$. The slope $a_T=0.50$ is shallower than $2/3$ predicted from $M \propto \hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and the self-similar model $T_X\propto M^{2/3}$. The relation also implies that the mass limit of the HSC cluster catalog of $M_{500c}\gtrsim 2 \times 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$ [@lieu16] which is broadly consistent with the mass limit from the number density (Section \[sec:numden\]). We also find $1\sigma$ intrinsic scatter of $0.12$ in $\log T_X$, which is comparable to the scatter for the SDSS CAMIRA and redMaPPer cluster catalogs [@rozo14a; @oguri14]. Figure \[fig:check\_tx\] also suggests that there is no strong redshift evolution of this relation. We then compare $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ with X-ray luminosity $L_{X,500}$ for the same clusters in Figure \[fig:check\_lx\]. It has been shown that the $L_X$-$T_X$ relation evolves with redshift such that $E(z)^{-\gamma_{LT}} L_X \propto T_X^B$, where $E(z)=\sqrt{\Omega_M(1+z)^3+\Omega_\Lambda}$, $B\sim 3$, and the self-similar model predicts $\gamma_{LT}=1$ [e.g., @giles16]. We include the effect of redshift evolution by studying the correlation between $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and evolution-corrected X-ray luminosity $\left[E(z)\right]^{-1}L_{X,500}$ assuming the self-similar evolution $\gamma_{LT}=1$. As before, Figure \[fig:check\_lx\] indicates a good correlation between the richness and X-ray luminosity. We quantify this by fitting it to a power-law model: $$\log\left(\frac{\left[E(z)\right]^{-1}L_{X,500}}{10^{43}{\rm erg/s}}\right)=a_L\log\left(\frac{\hat{N}_{\rm mem}}{30}\right)+b_L,$$ and find $a_L=1.33\pm0.24$, $b_L=0.47\pm0.05$, and the intrinsic scatter $\sigma=0.32$. The residual of fitting as a function of redshift shown in Figure \[fig:check\_lx\] indicates a clear trend with redshift. This may suggest a redshift evolution stronger than the self-similar prediction, i.e., $\gamma_{LT}>1$ [see also @giles16], although it must be partly due to the Malmquist bias. This is because the X-ray cluster sample is a flux-limited sample and X-ray luminosities are more directly related to X-ray fluxes. The idea is supported by the fact that XMM-LSS clusters, which have the lower X-ray flux limit, tend to have lower luminosities than those of XXL clusters at all redshift range. Hence in order to derive the intrinsic scaling relation we need to take account of flux limits of these X-ray surveys, which we leave for future work. Completeness estimation {#sec:compl} ----------------------- ![Completeness of HSC Wide S16A clusters which is estimated using X-ray clusters. The completeness is defined by the fraction of X-ray clusters that match the HSC cluster catalog to all X-ray clusters. The completeness is estimated as a function of X-ray temperature threshold (i.e., for each $T_X$ all X-ray clusters with $>T_X$ are used to derive the completeness). <span data-label="fig:compl"></span>](fig11.eps){width="8cm"} In addition to using mocks (see Section \[sec:mock\]), we estimate the completeness of the HSC Wide S16A catalog using the X-ray cluster catalog. Here we adopt a simple approach to estimate the completeness by the fraction of X-ray clusters with optical counterparts to all X-ray clusters. Given an ambiguity of matching between HSC and X-ray clusters, the completeness presented here should be interpreted with caution. We derive the completeness as a function of X-ray temperature threshold; for a given $T_X$, we use all X-ray cluster above $T_X$ to derive the completeness. We also restrict the redshift range of the X-ray clusters to $0.1<z<1.1$ for the completeness estimation. Figure \[fig:compl\] plots the estimated completeness as a function of X-ray temperature threshold. We find that the completeness is generally high, $\sim 0.8-0.9$. There are a couple of X-ray clusters with relatively high X-ray temperatures, $T_X\sim 5$ keV, which do not have counterparts in the HSC cluster catalog. We find that these X-ray clusters have companion X-ray clusters separated by $\sim 8'$ at similar redshifts. For example, one of them corresponds to a member of a supercluster of galaxies at $z=0.43$ [@pompei16]. Since the CAMIRA algorithm adopts a compensated spatial filter for creating a richness map [@oguri14], detections of companion clusters near massive clusters tend to be suppressed, as also noted in @miyazaki15. The current analysis of completeness is limited by a small number of X-ray sample, and an extended analysis using a larger sample of X-ray clusters is useful for quantifying the impact of paired clusters on the completeness. Positional offset distribution {#sec:miscenter} ------------------------------ ![Distribution of positional offset between HSC Wide S16A clusters and X-ray clusters, which is derived using 50 X-ray clusters from XXL and XMM-LSS surveys that matches the HSC cluster catalog. The offsets $R_{\rm off}$ are defined by physical transverse distances between HSC and X-ray cluster centers. The solid line shows the best-fit model assuming the functional form of equation (\[eq:poff\]). <span data-label="fig:offdist"></span>](fig12.eps){width="8cm"} It has been known that optical cluster finders often misidentify centers of clusters. This miscentering effect is important for applications of optically-selected clusters such as weak lensing analysis. Miscentering of optically-selected clusters have indeed been studied with various approaches, including offsets between optical and X-ray cluster centers [e.g., @lin04; @mahdavi13; @rozo14a; @oguri14; @rykoff16], offsets between optical and SZ cluster centers [e.g., @song12; @sehgal13; @sifon13; @saro15], and weak lensing [e.g., @oguri10; @george12; @oguri14; @ford14; @viola15; @vanuitert16; @miyatake16]. In this paper we use offsets between HSC Wide S16A clusters, whose centers are defined by the locations of BCGs identified by the CAMIRA algorithm [see @oguri14], and the X-ray clusters from XXL and XMM-LSS to study the miscentering effect. Figure \[fig:offdist\] shows the offset (physical transverse distance $R_{\rm off}$) distribution derived from the 50 X-ray clusters that are matched with the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog. In the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog, cluster centers are defined by centroids of BCGs identified by the CAMIRA algorithm. The distribution is clearly peaked at $R_{\rm off}\sim 0$, indicating that HSC Wide S16A clusters are well centered on average. On the other hand, there is also a tail toward large $R_{\rm off}$, as has been found in other optically-selected cluster catalogs. We fit the measured distribution to the following two-component Gaussian model [e.g., @oguri11] $$\begin{aligned} p(R_{\rm off})&=&f_{\rm cen}\frac{R_{\rm off}}{\sigma_1^2}\exp\left(-\frac{R_{\rm off}^2}{2\sigma_1^2}\right) \nonumber\\ &&+(1-f_{\rm cen})\frac{R_{\rm off}}{\sigma_2^2}\exp\left(-\frac{R_{\rm off}^2}{2\sigma_2^2}\right). \label{eq:poff}\end{aligned}$$ We simultaneously fit the fraction of well-centered clusters, $f_{\rm cen}$, the standard deviation for the well-centered population, $\sigma_1$, and the standard deviation for the miscentered population, $\sigma_2$. The best-fit parameters are $f_{\rm cen}=0.68\pm0.09$, $\sigma_1=0.046\pm0.009 h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$, and $\sigma_2=0.26\pm0.04 h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$. We confirmed that fitting results with smaller bin sizes are consistent with the result above within the error bars. The best-fit model shown in Figure \[fig:offdist\] indicates that the two-component model fits the observation reasonably well. We check the possible richness dependence of the offset distribution by dividing the cluster catalog into two richness bins, $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}<30$ and $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>30$, and repeating the analysis above. Given the smaller number of X-ray clusters in each richness bin, we fix $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ to the best-fit values obtained from the analysis of the full sample, and fit only $f_{\rm cen}$. We find that $f_{\rm cen}=0.66\pm 0.10$ for $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}<30$, and $f_{\rm cen}=0.71\pm 0.12$ for $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>30$, which indicates that there is no strong dependence of the offset distribution on richness. Analysis of mock galaxy samples {#sec:mock} =============================== Construction of mock galaxy samples {#sec:genmock} ----------------------------------- We create mock galaxy samples specifically designed for testing cluster finding algorithms. Since accurate galaxy colors are crucial for this purpose, we use colors of true observed galaxies in the HSC Survey. We use the HSC galaxy catalog in the COSMOS [@scoville07] field for the field galaxy population, and use CAMIRA clusters in HSC Wide S16A to select cluster member galaxies. $N$-body simulations are used to produce realistic distributions of halo masses and redshifts. Thus our mock galaxy catalogs use realistic cluster distributions, and also contain gaps and holes in the spatial distribution of galaxies due to bright stars and bad columns, which allow realistic characterization of completeness and purity. We provide a detailed description of our mock galaxy samples in Appendix 3. We note that we need to make assumptions on the input richness-mass relation, red galaxy fraction, and their redshift evolution in order to create these mock galaxy samples, which may not necessarily be correct. While quantitative results such as the scatter in the observed richness-mass relation and the completeness as a function of halo masses depend on these assumptions, we expect that the qualitative behavior of the completeness and purity estimated from these mocks is not very sensitive to these assumptions. Analysis results ---------------- ![Comparison of cluster richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and halo mass $M_{\rm 200c}$ from the analysis of mock galaxy catalogs (see Section \[sec:genmock\] for the description). For illustrative purpose, we assign $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}=12$ for halos without any counterpart in the cluster catalog, and $M_{\rm 200c}=1.5\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_\odot$ for clusters without any counterpart in the halo catalog. The dashed line shows a power-law fit to $\langle \log M|N\rangle$ using the matching result with $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>20$ (see equation \[eq:nmpow\_mock\]). In the upper and right panels, we also show the histograms of matched (<span>*solid*</span>) and unmatched (<span>*dashed*</span>) clusters/halos. <span data-label="fig:mock_nm"></span>](fig13.eps){width="8cm"} We run the CAMIRA algorithm on the mock galaxy samples using the same setup as the one used to create the HSC Wide S16A catalog. We then cross match CAMIRA cluster catalogs on the mocks with input halo catalogs. We use the matching criterion of the physical transverse distance being smaller than 1$h^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ and the difference between the halo redshift and the cluster photometric redshift being smaller than $0.1$. Given the limited range of the redshift and halo mass of our mock galaxy samples (see Appendix 3), we also restrict the redshift range of halos to $0.3<z_{\rm halo}<1.0$ and the mass range to $M_{\rm 200c}>2\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_\odot$ in cross-matching. We record all clusters and halos that fall within the same redshift range but fail to match, which are used to estimate completeness and purity below. We analyze 90 realizations of the COSMOS-size mock galaxy samples, leading to the total area of $\sim 144$ deg$^2$. Figure \[fig:mock\_nm\] shows the result of matching. As expected we can clearly see a positive correlation between halo masses and richness. We find that most of the CAMIRA clusters in the mocks have counterparts in the halo catalog except for the very low richness end, which indicates that the purity of the CAMIRA cluster catalog, which is defined by the fraction of CAMIRA clusters that corresponds to real massive halos, is high, $>0.95$ down to the richness limit of $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}=15$. On the other hand, Figure \[fig:mock\_nm\] indicates that there are halos up to $\sim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$ that are not detected by the CAMIRA algorithm, which implies that the completeness, which is defined by the fraction of halos that are correctly identified by the CAMIRA algorithm, requires careful studies. Our CAMIRA cluster sample is constructed in the limited richness range of $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>15$, which may impact on the estimate of the completeness as a function of halo mass. We derive a simple correction of the effect of the lower limit of the richness by assuming a log-normal form for the mass-richness relation $$p(\log M|N)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_{\log M}}\exp\left[-\frac{(\log M-\langle\log M|N\rangle)^2}{2\sigma_{\log M}^2}\right],$$ here we adopt simplified notations, $N=\hat{N}_{\rm mem}$ and $M=M_{200c}$ in units of $h^{-1}M_\odot$. For the median richness-mass relation $\langle\log M|N\rangle$, we assume the following power-law form $$\langle\log M|N\rangle =a_M\log\left(\frac{N}{30}\right)+b_M. \label{eq:nmpow_mock}$$ To derive the parameters, we use the matching result only with $N>20$ in order to reduce the effect of lower mass limit and perform fitting. The resulting parameters are $a_M=1.31$, $b_M=13.89$, and $\sigma_{\log M}=0.19$. We also confirm that the log-normal model reproduces the observed distribution of halo masses around the median richness-mass relation reasonably well. The Bayes theorem suggests that $p(\log M|N)$ can be converted to $p(\log N|M)$ via $$p(\log N|M)=\frac{p(\log M|N)p(\log N)}{\int d(\log N)p(\log M|N)p(\log N)}.$$ Using the locally power-law model [@rozo14b], it is shown that this distribution has a log-normal distribution with the mean and variance of $$\langle\log N|M\rangle=\frac{\log M -b_M}{a_M} -\frac{\beta\ln 10}{a_M^2}\sigma_{\log M}^2,$$ $$\sigma_{\log N}=\frac{1}{a_M}\sigma_{\log M},$$ where $\beta$ is the slope of the richness function, $p(\log N) \propto dn/d\log N \propto N^{-\beta}$. We assume $\beta=1$ for simplicity, which is broadly consistent with the observed richness distribution near the richness threshold. We can then compute the selection function (or completeness) for a sample with $N>N_{\rm lim}$ predicted by the log-normal model as $$\begin{aligned} S(M| N>N_{\rm lim})&=&\frac{p(\log M|N>N_{\rm lim})}{p(\log M)}\nonumber\\ &=&\int_{N_{\rm lim}}^\infty p(\log N|M) d(\log N)\nonumber \\ &=& \frac{1}{2}{\rm erfc}\left[\frac{\log N_{\rm lim}-\langle\log N|M\rangle}{\sqrt{2}\sigma_{\log N}}\right].\end{aligned}$$ The completeness we are interested in here is the completeness that cannot be explained by a simple extrapolation of the mass-richness relation. To derive this, we first prepare a sample of CAMIRA clusters in the mocks with $N>N_{\rm lim}$ that successfully match to the halo catalog. We denote the number distribution of these clusters as $n_{\rm obs}(M|N>N_{\rm lim})$. From the original halo catalog, we can also derive the number distribution of all halos, $n(M)$. We estimate the completeness, for which the effect of the lower limit of richness is corrected, as $${\rm completeness}=\frac{n_{\rm obs}(M|N>N_{\rm lim})}{n(M)S(M| N>N_{\rm lim})}. \label{eq:compl}$$ Put another way, this provides the incompleteness of identifying halos that cannot be explained by a simple extrapolation of the mass-richness relation. ![Completeness estimated from the analysis of mock galaxy catalogs as a function of halo mass $M_{\rm 200c}$. The completeness is defined by equation (\[eq:compl\]). The solid line shows the completeness using all halos. Short-dashed and long-dashed lines indicate the completeness for subsamples of halos at $0.3<z<0.6$ and $0.6<z<1.0$, respectively. <span data-label="fig:mock_compl"></span>](fig14.eps){width="8cm"} Figure \[fig:mock\_compl\] shows the completeness defined by equation (\[eq:compl\]). Here we adopt $N_{\rm lim}=15$, although the result is insensitive to the specific choice of $N_{\rm lim}$ as expected. We note that, for $N_{\rm lim}=15$, the correction factor $S(M)$ is very close to unity down to $M_{\rm 200c}\sim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$ and decreases to $\sim 0.5$ at $M_{\rm 200c}\sim 3\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_\odot$, and hence the correction of the completeness due to $S(M)$ is relatively minor. We find that the completeness after the $N_{\rm lim}$ correction is reasonably high ($> 0.9$) at high mass end, $M_{\rm 200c}\gtrsim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$, and decreases below $10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$. This result is also broadly consistent with the completeness estimated from X-ray clusters shown in Figure \[fig:compl\]. A possible explanation of decreasing completeness at low mass end is that the scatter in the richness-mass relation increases rapidly toward lower richness, due to the larger Poisson noise of the number of cluster member galaxies and more significant contribution of background fluctuations to the richness that enhances the scatter. In either case, the high completeness at high cluster masses is encouraging from the viewpoint of using massive optically-selected clusters as a cosmological probe. It is possible that the completeness changes with redshift. To check the possible redshift dependence, we divide the mock halo sample into two redshift bins with $0.3<z<0.6$ and $0.6<z<1.0$, and derive completeness for both the subsamples. The result shown in Figure \[fig:mock\_compl\] indicates that the completeness indeed depends on the redshift. For the low-redshift halos, the completeness remains high down to $\sim 8\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_\odot$, whereas for high-redshift halos the completeness starts to drop at higher masses. Decreasing completeness with increasing redshift for a fixed halo mass may be partly due to decreasing red galaxy fraction which is taken into account in the mock galaxy catalog construction (see Appendix 3). In both redshift bins the completeness is close to unity above $\sim 1.5 \times 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$. This redshift evolution of the completeness should also be taken into account for careful statistical studies of CAMIRA clusters. Again, we emphasize that our quantitative results from the mock catalog depend on input models, such as cosmological parameters and mass-richness relations for populating galaxies in halos, which can differ from true values. For example, the redshift evolution of the completeness discussed above depends crucially on the redshift evolution of the input mass-richness relation and the input redshift evolution of the red fraction in clusters (see Appendix 3). In particular, we note that our current mock catalog appears to overestimate richness in the sense that the number density of CAMIRA-detected clusters in the mock as a function of richness is a factor of $\sim 4$ higher than in observations, which suggests room for improvements of the mock. Nevertheless, the mock result should still be useful for understanding qualitative behavior of the completeness and purity of the CAMIRA algorithm, and both the mock catalog analysis presented here and the comparison with other (such as X-ray) cluster catalogs as presented in Section \[sec:xray\] are important for characterizing the CAMIRA cluster catalog. Summary {#sec:summary} ======= We have presented a new optically-selected cluster catalog from the HSC Survey. From the HSC Wide S16A dataset covering $\sim 232$ deg$^2$, we have constructed a sample of 1921 clusters at redshift $0.1<z_{\rm cl}<1.1$ and with richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>15$. Based on the number density, we infer that the rough mass limit of the cluster sample is $M_{\rm 200m}\gtrsim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$. We have found that cluster redshifts are accurate with the bias $\delta_z<0.005$ and the scatter $\sigma_z<0.01$ for most of the redshift range. The photometric redshift accuracy is comparable to that of optically-selected clusters in SDSS, but HSC clusters extend to much higher redshifts. We have also compared the HSC Wide S16A cluster catalog with X-ray clusters from XXL and XMM-LSS surveys, finding tight correlations between richness and X-ray properties. In addition, we have derived the distribution of positional offsets of cluster centers using the X-ray clusters and found that the fraction of well-centered clusters is $\sim 0.7$, with no significant dependence on richness. We have analyzed mock galaxy catalogs to study the completeness and purity. We have found a high purity, and also the high completeness for halos with masses above $\sim 10^{14}h^{-1}M_\odot$. The completeness depends on redshift such that completeness for lower mass halos is higher at lower redshift. This work presents the first cluster catalog from the HSC Survey, and demonstrates the power of the HSC Survey for studies of high-redshift clusters. The exquisite depth of the HSC Survey allows us to detect almost all cluster member galaxies above $M_*\sim 10^{10.2}M_\odot$ even at $z\sim 1.1$, and hence allows a reliable cluster search at such high redshifts. For instance, by extrapolating the result in this paper, we expect to construct a large catalog of $\sim 1000$ clusters with richness $\hat{N}_{\rm mem}>20$ at $z\sim 1$ from the final HSC Wide Survey dataset covering $\sim 1400$ deg$^2$. We plan to calibrate cluster masses using stacked weak lensing technique, as well as careful comparisons with X-ray and SZ cluster catalogs, including an extended XXL X-ray cluster catalog and SZ clusters from ACTPol [@niemack10]. We thank Crist<span>ó</span>bal Sif<span>ó</span>n for useful comments, and an anonymous referee for useful suggestions. This work is supported in part by World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Initiative), MEXT, Japan, and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 26800093. This work is in part supported by MEXT Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas (No. 15H05887, 15H05892, 15H05893). YTL acknowledges support from the Ministry of Science and Technology grants MOST 104-2112-M-001-047 and MOST 105-2112-M-001-028-MY3. HM is supported by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The Hyper Suprime-Cam (HSC) collaboration includes the astronomical communities of Japan and Taiwan, and Princeton University. The HSC instrumentation and software were developed by the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan (NAOJ), the Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (Kavli IPMU), the University of Tokyo, the High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), the Academia Sinica Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics in Taiwan (ASIAA), and Princeton University. Funding was contributed by the FIRST program from Japanese Cabinet Office, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), the Toray Science Foundation, NAOJ, Kavli IPMU, KEK, ASIAA, and Princeton University. The Pan-STARRS1 Surveys (PS1) have been made possible through contributions of the Institute for Astronomy, the University of Hawaii, the Pan-STARRS Project Office, the Max-Planck Society and its participating institutes, the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, Heidelberg and the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, Garching, The Johns Hopkins University, Durham University, the University of Edinburgh, Queen's University Belfast, the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, the Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope Network Incorporated, the National Central University of Taiwan, the Space Telescope Science Institute, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under Grant No. NNX08AR22G issued through the Planetary Science Division of the NASA Science Mission Directorate, the National Science Foundation under Grant No. AST-1238877, the University of Maryland, and Eotvos Lorand University (ELTE). This paper makes use of software developed for the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope. We thank the LSST Project for making their code available as free software at http://dm.lsst.org. Based \[in part\] on data collected at the Subaru Telescope and retrieved from the HSC data archive system, which is operated by the Subaru Telescope and Astronomy Data Center at National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. Appendix 1. Cluster catalogs {#appendix-1.-cluster-catalogs .unnumbered} ============================ We construct three cluster catalogs from the HSC S16A data. The first catalog is from the Wide region without applying for a bright star mask. This catalog is used in the analysis throughout the paper. The second catalog is also from the Wide region, but with the bright star mask. The bright star mask removes object near bright stars, and the current mask is designed conservatively such that it removes nearly $\sim 10\%$ of objects. The current cluster catalog with the star mask suffers from the effect of masking bright galaxies, which is discussed in Appendix 2. The third catalog is from the Deep region covering $\sim 25$ deg$^2$. Even
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1701'}