HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE COMBINED STRONG AND WEAK LENSING ANALYSIS OF THE CLASH SAMPLE: MASS AND MAGNIFICATION MODELS AND SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTIES
HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE COMBINED STRONG AND WEAK LENSING ANALYSIS OF THE CLASH SAMPLE: MASS AND MAGNIFICATION MODELS AND SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTIES
复制标题
哈勃太空望远镜结合强弱透镜分析碰撞样本：质量和放大率模型以及系统不确定性
DOI：
10.1088/0004-637x/801/1/44
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Bradley
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Zitrin;A. Fabris;J. Merten;P. Melchior;M. Meneghetti;A. Koekemoer;D. Coe;M. Maturi;M. Bartelmann;M. Postman;K. Umetsu;G. Seidel;I. Sendra;T. Broadhurst;I. Balestra;A. Biviano;C. Grillo;A. Mercurio;M. Nonino;P. Rosati;L. Bradley
我们展示了哈勃太空望远镜（HST）数据的综合透镜分析结果，该数据是使用哈勃星团样本进行的完整星团透镜和超新星巡天。我们识别了以前未发现的多个图像，从而允许对星团内部质量分布和轮廓进行改进或首次约束。我们将这些强透镜约束与 HST 视场 (FOV) 内的弱透镜形状测量相结合，共同约束质量分布。该分析以两种不同的常见参数化方式进行（一种对星系和暗物质采用光迹质量，另一种对暗物质采用分析椭圆纳瓦罗-弗伦克-怀特形式），以更好地评估潜在的系统性——这对于深部簇透镜巡天来说是最重要的，特别是在研究放大的高红移天体时。我们发现，整个中心视场的典型（中值）相对系统差异在（无量纲）质量密度 κ 中约为 40%，在放大倍数 μ 中约为 20%。我们展示了每个簇的这些差异的地图，以及质量分布、临界曲线和二维 (2D) 积分质量分布。对于爱因斯坦半径 (z s= 2)，我们发现两个模型之间的一致性通常在 10% 以内，并且爱因斯坦质量的一致性通常在 15% 以内。在较大的半径下，两个模型的总投影二维积分质量分布在 r∼ 2' 内，相差 ∼ 30%。将两种方法得到的样品表面密度分布叠加在一起，我们得到径向范围 [5350] kpc 内的平均斜率 dlog (Σ)/dlog (r)∼− 0.64±0.1。最后，我们还将两个模型之间的平均放大率、表面密度和剪切差的行为特征描述为距中心的半径和这些量的最佳拟合值的函数。所有质量模型和放大图均向社区公开。
We present results from a comprehensive lensing analysis in Hubble Space Telescope (HST) data of the complete Cluster Lensing And Supernova survey with Hubble cluster sample. We identify previously undiscovered multiple images, allowing improved or first constraints on the cluster inner mass distributions and profiles. We combine these strong lensing constraints with weak lensing shape measurements within the HST field of view (FOV) to jointly constrain the mass distributions. The analysis is performed in two different common parameterizations (one adopts light-traces-mass for both galaxies and dark matter while the other adopts an analytical, elliptical Navarro–Frenk–White form for the dark matter) to provide a better assessment of the underlying systematics—which is most important for deep, cluster-lensing surveys, especially when studying magnified high-redshift objects. We find that the typical (median), relative systematic differences throughout the central FOV are∼ 40% in the (dimensionless) mass density, κ, and∼ 20% in the magnification, μ. We show maps of these differences for each cluster, as well as the mass distributions, critical curves, and two-dimensional (2D)-integrated mass profiles. For the Einstein radii (z s= 2) we find that all typically agree within 10% between the two models, and Einstein masses agree, typically, within∼ 15%. At larger radii, the total projected, 2D-integrated mass profiles of the two models, within r∼ 2', differ by∼ 30%. Stacking the surface-density profiles of the sample from the two methods together, we obtain an average slope of dlog (Σ)/dlog (r)∼− 0.64±0.1, in the radial range [5350] kpc. Last, we also characterize the behavior of the average magnification, surface density, and shear differences between the two models as a function of both the radius from the center and the best-fit values of these quantities. All mass models and magnification maps are made publicly available for the community.