sort results by

Use logical operators AND, OR, NOT and round brackets to construct complex queries. Whitespace-separated words are treated as ANDed.

Show articles per page in mode

Fabris, Agnese

Normalized to: Fabris, A.

1 article(s) in total. 25 co-authors. Median position in authors list is 2,0.

[1]  oai:arXiv.org:1411.1414  [pdf] - 1223029
Hubble Space Telescope Combined Strong and Weak Lensing Analysis of the CLASH Sample: Mass and Magnification Models and Systematic Uncertainties
Comments: 35 pages (20 main text pages, plus 15 pages for additional figures and tables); 2 Tables, 17 Figures. V3: accepted version; some minor corrections and additions made. V4: corrected several entries in Table 2. All mass models and magnification maps are made publicly available for the community
Submitted: 2014-11-05, last modified: 2015-01-16
We present results from a comprehensive lensing analysis in HST data, of the complete CLASH cluster sample. We identify new multiple-images previously undiscovered 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 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 NFW 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 $\sim40\%$ in the (dimensionless) mass density, $\kappa$, and $\sim20\%$ in the magnification, $\mu$. We show maps of these differences for each cluster, as well as the mass distributions, critical curves, and 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 $\sim15\%$. At larger radii, the total projected, 2D integrated mass profiles of the two models, within $r\sim2\arcmin$, differ by $\sim30\%$. Stacking the surface-density profiles of the sample from the two methods together, we obtain an average slope of $d\log (\Sigma)/d\log(r)\sim-0.64\pm0.1$, in the radial range [5,350] kpc. Lastly, 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.