Gravitational LensingAnalysis of CLASH clusters

Adi Zitrin @ HD 10/2011

Outline of talk

• What have we done so far: clusters analyzed, methods, strong vs weak, recent developments

• What do we need to do by the next CLASH meeting

• How do we plan to do that

Bank of tools:Strong lensing:- Adi@Tom’s parametric method – ideal for

finding multiple-images and to obtain a quick solution due to the small number of parameters.

- Dan’s non-parametric method – very flexible and fast once multiple-images are known.

- Stella’s etal parametric method.- Other public methods such as Lenstool etc for

comparison if needed. Else?

Bank of tools:Weak lensing:- Keiichi’s WL method (KSB based, Elinor’s color

selection,Mario&Alberto). Both 1D, 2D analyses, recently including, importantly, a magnification bias constraint.

- Keiichi’s multi-body method – same as above but by simulating several bodies – often seen also in background etc.

- Claudio’s HST WL?- Stella’s etal, others?

Bank of tools:Joint analysis:- One could combine independent SL and WL

measurements, and say, fit an overall NFW profile etc.

- Julian@Matthias’ SL+WL joint analysis method.Effect of LSS:- Ole, Ofer etal.Triaxiality fit:- Lensing+X-ray, SZ(?) – Dan, Megan etal

What have we done so far?

Abell 383• SL+WL analysis, Paper accepted:

MACS 1206

• SL analysis; Paper submitted ApJL

A2261

• Paper ~ready, Coe etal, SL+WL, elongation, CM

A2261

Some preliminary modelsfor cycle 18 clusters:

M11495 M0744

M0647M2129

Macs 0717 largest lens known

Status and To-Do:

In our lensing session tmrw we also need to decide on who does what

What do we wish to study:

• 1. Mass profiles (jointly)

• 1a. Mass Profiles: establish an observational C-M relation, and the effect of triaxiality:

What do we wish to study:

What do we wish to study:

• 1b. Magnification for High-z galaxies

• 2a. Mass distribution: Strong regime: ellipticity, subtructure, effect on SL properties

What do we wish to study:

• 2b. Mass distribution: weak regime: multi-halo analysis and background structures

What do we wish to study:

BTW - More CCLs?

• 2c: Mass distribution: constrain and calibrate the universal Einstein radius distribution:

• 2d: Mass distribution: both regimes: how does DM condensate and concentrate? Could be put constraints on this? Tom? Leonidas?

What do we wish to study:

• 3. Constraints on the (higher end of) mass function

• 4. Comparison to simulations, maybe look into over-cooling, feedback influence, adiabatic contraction

What do we wish to study:

• 5. Constraining the cosmological parameters: Dependence of the lensing distance (AD_dist) on the cosmological parameters. By Assuming different cosmologies one can probe the best fit (In prep., e.g.):

Zitrin + in prep.

Jullo + 2010

Jullo + 2010

What do we wish to study:

• 6. Very inner slopes, especially of/inside BCG regime. Need SL constraints from radial images, light SF, velocity dispersion etc.

• Newman et al:

What do we wish to study:

Recent Development

• MIF: fully automated Multiple-Image Finder• Goal: one button press to get a list of all

multiple-images, with their redshift, and a refined lens or mass model. Possible?

• Tryout: Gregor’s ArcFinder, BPZ (Txitxo, Alberto, Dan), Adi’s mass model: combined.

• Let’s see a first result compared to a real analysis:

Multiple-Image Finder:

• Runtime of 1-2 days to finalized mass model!! (relative to ~1 month’s work before)

Recent 2

• M1206 ref report + model-independent mass slope from multiple images (also for photo-z paper estimate on how errors propagate into the mass profile).

Summary:• Many more CLASH clusters to analyze in SL, WL, derive

mass distributions, profiles and Einstein radii, compare explicitly with X-ray, SZE, simulations.

• C-M relation• CCL?• cD galaxies: M and M/L ratio and profile where multiple

images are near. Inner profile• High-z galaxies• Constraints on cosmological models (later today)• Development of a tool for multiple-image finding• Details to be discussed in sessions