Home News About Us Contact Contributors Disclaimer Privacy Policy Help FAQ

Quick Search
My eDoc
Session History
Support Wiki
Direct access to
document ID:

          Institute: MPI für Astronomie     Collection: Publikationen_mpia     Display Documents

ID: 720349.0, MPI für Astronomie / Publikationen_mpia
Hubble Space Telescope combined strong and weak lensing analysis of the CLASH sample: Mass and magnification models and systematic uncertainties
Authors:Zitrin, A.; Fabris, A.; Merten, J.; Melchior, P.; Meneghetti, M.; Koekemoer, A.; Coe, D.; Maturi, M.; Bartelmann, M.; Postman, M.; Umetsu, K.; Seidel, G.; Sendra, I.; Broadhurst, T.; Balestra, I.; Biviano, A.; Grillo, C.; Mercurio, A.; Nonino, M.; Rosati, P.; Bradley, L.; Carrasco, M.; Donahue, M.; Ford, H.; Frye, B. L.; Moustakas, J.
Date of Publication (YYYY-MM-DD):2015
Title of Journal:The Astrophysical Journal
Issue / Number:1
Start Page:id. 44 (21 pp)
Audience:Not Specified
Abstract / Description: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 (zs = 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.
Free Keywords:galaxies: clusters: general; galaxies: high-redshift; gravitational lensing: strong; gravitational lensing: weak
External Publication Status:published
Document Type:Article
Communicated by:N. N.
Affiliations:MPI für Astronomie
The scope and number of records on eDoc is subject to the collection policies defined by each institute - see "info" button in the collection browse view.