In recent years, breakthroughs in methods and data have enabled gravitational time delays to emerge as a very powerful tool to measure the Hubble constant $H_0$. However, published state-of-the-art analyses require of order 1 year of expert investigator time and up to a million hours of computing time per system. Furthermore, as precision improves, it is crucial to identify and mitigate systematic uncertainties. With this time delay lens modelling challenge we aim to assess the level of precision and accuracy of the modelling techniques that are currently fast enough to handle of order 50 lenses, via the blind analysis of simulated datasets presented in paper I. The results in Rung 1 and Rung 2 show that methods that use only the point source positions tend to have lower precision ($10 - 20\%$) while remaining accurate. In Rung 2, the methods that exploit the full information of the imaging and kinematic datasets can recover $H_0$ within the target accuracy ($ |A| < 2\%$) and precision ($< 6\%$ per system), even in the presence of poorly known point spread function and complex source morphology. A post-unblinding analysis of Rung 3 showed the numerical precision of the ray-traced cosmological simulations to be insufficient to test lens modelling methodology at the percent level, making the results difficult to interpret. A new challenge with improved simulations is needed to make further progress in the investigation of systematic uncertainties. For completeness, we present the Rung 3 results in an appendix, and use them to discuss various approaches to mitigating against similar subtle data generation effects in future blind challenges.

In preparation for the era of the time-domain astronomy with upcoming large-scale surveys, we propose a state-space representation of a multivariate damped random walk process as a tool to analyze irregularly-spaced multi-filter light curves with heteroscedastic measurement errors. We adopt a computationally efficient and scalable Kalman-filtering approach to evaluate the likelihood function, leading to maximum $O(k^3n)$ complexity, where $k$ is the number of available bands and $n$ is the number of unique observation times across the $k$ bands. This is a significant computational advantage over a commonly used univariate Gaussian process that can stack up all multi-band light curves in one vector with maximum $O(k^3n^3)$ complexity. Using such efficient likelihood computation, we provide both maximum likelihood estimates and Bayesian posterior samples of the model parameters. Three numerical illustrations are presented; (i) analyzing simulated five-band light curves for a comparison with independent single-band fits; (ii) analyzing five-band light curves of a quasar obtained from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Stripe~82 to estimate the short-term variability and timescale; (iii) analyzing gravitationally lensed $g$- and $r$-band light curves of Q0957+561 to infer the time delay. Two R packages, Rdrw and timedelay, are publicly available to fit the proposed models.

The well-known Bayes theorem assumes that a posterior distribution is a probability distribution. However, the posterior distribution may no longer be a probability distribution if an improper prior distribution (non-probability measure) such as an unbounded uniform prior is used. Improper priors are often used in the astronomical literature to reflect a lack of prior knowledge, but checking whether the resulting posterior is a probability distribution is sometimes neglected. It turns out that 23 articles out of 75 articles (30.7%) published online in two renowned astronomy journals (ApJ and MNRAS) between Jan 1, 2017 and Oct 15, 2017 make use of Bayesian analyses without rigorously establishing posterior propriety. A disturbing aspect is that a Gibbs-type Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method can produce a seemingly reasonable posterior sample even when the posterior is not a probability distribution (Hobert and Casella, 1996). In such cases, researchers may erroneously make probabilistic inferences without noticing that the MCMC sample is from a non-existing probability distribution. We review why checking posterior propriety is fundamental in Bayesian analyses, and discuss how to set up scientifically motivated proper priors.

We present optical multi-colour photometry of V404 Cyg during the outburst from December, 2015 to January, 2016 together with the simultaneous X-ray data. This outburst occurred less than 6 months after the previous outburst in June-July, 2015. These two outbursts in 2015 were of a slow rise and rapid decay-type and showed large-amplitude ($\sim$2 mag) and short-term ($\sim$10 min-3 hours) optical variations even at low luminosity (0.01-0.1$L_{\rm Edd}$). We found correlated optical and X-ray variations in two $\sim$1 hour time intervals and performed Bayesian time delay estimations between them. In the previous version, the observation times of X-ray light curves were measured at the satellite and their system of times was Terrestrial Time (TT), while those of optical light curves were measured at the Earth and their system of times was Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). In this version, we have corrected the observation times and obtained a Bayesian estimate of an optical delay against the X-ray emission, which is $\sim$30 s, during those two intervals. In addition, the relationship between the optical and X-ray luminosity was $L_{\rm opt} \propto L_{\rm X}^{0.25-0.29}$ at that time. These features can be naturally explained by disc reprocessing.

The gravitational field of a galaxy can act as a lens and deflect the light emitted by a more distant object such as a quasar. Strong gravitational lensing causes multiple images of the same quasar to appear in the sky. Since the light in each gravitationally lensed image traverses a different path length from the quasar to the Earth, fluctuations in the source brightness are observed in the several images at different times. The time delay between these fluctuations can be used to constrain cosmological parameters and can be inferred from the time series of brightness data or light curves of each image. To estimate the time delay, we construct a model based on a state-space representation for irregularly observed time series generated by a latent continuous-time Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. We account for microlensing, an additional source of independent long-term extrinsic variability, via a polynomial regression. Our Bayesian strategy adopts a Metropolis-Hastings within Gibbs sampler. We improve the sampler by using an ancillarity-sufficiency interweaving strategy and adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo. We introduce a profile likelihood of the time delay as an approximation of its marginal posterior distribution. The Bayesian and profile likelihood approaches complement each other, producing almost identical results; the Bayesian method is more principled but the profile likelihood is simpler to implement. We demonstrate our estimation strategy using simulated data of doubly- and quadruply-lensed quasars, and observed data from quasars Q0957+561 and J1029+2623.

We present the results of the first strong lens time delay challenge. The motivation, experimental design, and entry level challenge are described in a companion paper. This paper presents the main challenge, TDC1, which consisted of analyzing thousands of simulated light curves blindly. The observational properties of the light curves cover the range in quality obtained for current targeted efforts (e.g.,~COSMOGRAIL) and expected from future synoptic surveys (e.g.,~LSST), and include simulated systematic errors. \nteamsA\ teams participated in TDC1, submitting results from \nmethods\ different method variants. After a describing each method, we compute and analyze basic statistics measuring accuracy (or bias) $A$, goodness of fit $\chi^2$, precision $P$, and success rate $f$. For some methods we identify outliers as an important issue. Other methods show that outliers can be controlled via visual inspection or conservative quality control. Several methods are competitive, i.e., give $|A|<0.03$, $P<0.03$, and $\chi^2<1.5$, with some of the methods already reaching sub-percent accuracy. The fraction of light curves yielding a time delay measurement is typically in the range $f = $20--40\%. It depends strongly on the quality of the data: COSMOGRAIL-quality cadence and light curve lengths yield significantly higher $f$ than does sparser sampling. Taking the results of TDC1 at face value, we estimate that LSST should provide around 400 robust time-delay measurements, each with $P<0.03$ and $|A|<0.01$, comparable to current lens modeling uncertainties. In terms of observing strategies, we find that $A$ and $f$ depend mostly on season length, while P depends mostly on cadence and campaign duration.