Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 86 references

Strong Lensing Tomography: Double and pseudo multi-source plane strong gravitational lensing to constrain dark energy

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-07-02 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Pseudo double-source plane lenses from large photometric surveys constrain the dark energy equation of state parameter w0 to a precision of approximately 0.45.

desk verdict PDSPLs scale DSPL tomography to large photometric samples for w0 forecasts, but the results rest on untested assumptions about bias-free selection of self-similar pairs. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.01005 v1 pith:7UIBULIS submitted 2026-07-01 astro-ph.CO

Paras Sharma , Simon Birrer , Narayan Khadka , Timo Anguita , Adam Bolton , Sydney Erickson , Phil Holloway , Tian Li
show 7 more authors
Phil Marshall Dieu D. Nguyen Graham P. Smith Crescenzo Tortora Bryce Wedig the Strong Lensing Science Collaboration the LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords stronggravitationallensingdarkenergytomographymass-sheetdegeneracyLSSTgalaxy-galaxylensesphotometricsurveyscosmologicalconstraints
topics Dark Energy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper introduces pseudo double-source plane lenses as pairs of independent single-source plane strong lenses that share self-similar deflectors. This construction generalizes the tomographic information carried by rare true double-source plane lenses to the much larger samples of galaxy-galaxy lenses expected from surveys such as LSST. A hierarchical forecasting framework that folds in the mass-sheet degeneracy shows that the statistical volume of a 10-year LSST photometric catalog alone yields σ(w0) ∼ 0.45 while simultaneously recovering the mass-sheet degeneracy parameter and the deflector power-law slope to roughly 2 percent. Adding an external prior on the matter density further tightens the constraint to σ(w0) ∼ 0.29, a level competitive with existing Stage III weak-lensing results. The central claim is therefore that sheer numbers of suitably paired single-source lenses can substitute for the scarcity of true multi-plane systems and deliver cosmological information without multi-plane ray tracing.

What carries the argument

Pseudo Double-Source Plane Lenses (PDSPLs): pairs of independent single-source plane lenses with self-similar deflectors, which carry tomographic distance-ratio information while eliminating the intermediate-source mass contribution to the mass-sheet degeneracy.

What would settle it

A direct count in simulated or real LSST imaging that yields far fewer than the assumed number of identifiable PDSPLs with demonstrably self-similar deflectors, or a recovered w0 posterior whose width is substantially larger than the forecasted 0.45 after the same hierarchical modeling is applied to mock data.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that pseudo double-source plane lenses—pairs of independent single-source plane lenses with self-similar deflectors—generalize the double-source plane formalism to the ∼10^5 galaxy-galaxy lenses expected from LSST, Euclid, and Roman. Because the pairs are constructed from separate single-source systems, they are free from the intermediate-source mass problem by design and therefore free from the associated secondary mass-sheet degeneracy. When this population is analyzed inside a hierarchical model that marginalizes over the mass-sheet degeneracy parameter, the LSST 10-year photometric sample alone returns σ(w0) ∼ 0.45 while recovering the mass-sheet degeneracy parameter

Load-bearing premise

Large numbers of pseudo double-source plane lens pairs with self-similar deflectors can be identified and modeled from photometric data without residual mass-sheet degeneracy or selection biases that invalidate the hierarchical forecast.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The LSST 10-year photometric sample alone returns σ(w0) ∼ 0.45 while constraining the mass-sheet degeneracy parameter and deflector power-law slope to ∼2 percent.
  • Imposing a Gaussian prior N(0.3, 0.05) on Ωm tightens the dark-energy constraint to σ(w0) ∼ 0.29.
  • The photometric sample outperforms smaller subsets that receive precise spectroscopic follow-up, indicating that statistical volume dominates per-object precision.
  • The resulting constraint is competitive with current Stage III weak-lensing analyses under a flat w0waCDM cosmology.
  • The same framework applies directly to the lens samples expected from Euclid and Roman.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the self-similarity requirement can be verified on real deflectors, the method supplies an independent strong-lensing route to the same distance-ratio information used in weak-lensing tomography.
  • The approach could be tested by applying the hierarchical model to existing smaller lens catalogs to check whether the forecasted scaling with sample size is recovered.
  • Because the pairs are drawn from single-source systems, the technique may extend to other cosmological parameters that affect distance ratios, such as spatial curvature, without additional multi-plane modeling.
  • A natural next measurement would be the fraction of galaxy-galaxy lenses that satisfy the self-similarity criterion in high-resolution imaging.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces Pseudo Double-Source Plane Lenses (PDSPLs) — pairs of independent single-source-plane strong lenses with self-similar deflectors — to generalize double-source-plane lensing tomography to the ~10^5 galaxy-galaxy strong lenses expected from LSST photometry. It presents a hierarchical forecasting framework that jointly marginalizes over the mass-sheet degeneracy (MSD) parameter and deflector power-law slope while constraining the dark-energy equation-of-state parameters in a flat w0waCDM cosmology. The central forecast is that the LSST 10-year photometric sample alone yields σ(w0) ≈ 0.45 (tightening to ≈ 0.29 with an external N(0.3, 0.05) prior on Ωm), while simultaneously recovering the MSD parameter and slope to ~2 %; the photometric volume is claimed to outperform smaller spectroscopic subsets.

Significance. If the selection and modeling assumptions hold, the work demonstrates that statistical volume from photometric strong-lensing samples can deliver competitive dark-energy constraints while explicitly propagating the MSD into the posterior. The hierarchical treatment of the MSD as a free parameter rather than an external systematic is a clear methodological strength, and the explicit comparison of photometric versus spectroscopic follow-up strategies provides a useful quantitative benchmark for survey planning.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (hierarchical forecasting framework) and the abstract: the reported σ(w0) ∼ 0.45 rests on the premise that ∼10^5 PDSPL pairs with self-similar deflectors can be photometrically selected and modeled such that the distance-ratio information remains unbiased after marginalization over the MSD parameter. No explicit mock-catalog validation or selection-function derivation is shown demonstrating that redshift-dependent selection or imperfect self-similarity matching does not couple to the MSD marginalization and degrade or bias the forecast; this assumption is load-bearing for the central claim.
  2. [Table 1] Table 1 (or equivalent forecast summary table): the claim that the photometric sample outperforms spectroscopic subsets is presented as a key result, yet the table entries for the spectroscopic case appear to use a fixed smaller N without showing the corresponding hierarchical posterior widths when the same MSD and slope parameters are jointly fit; this comparison is central to the argument that volume dominates precision.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for the MSD parameter is introduced without an explicit equation reference in the early sections; a single defining equation (e.g., Eq. (3)) would improve clarity.
  2. [abstract] The abstract states constraints to “∼2 %” on the MSD parameter and slope; the corresponding forecast table or figure should report the exact 1σ fractional uncertainties for direct comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and positive assessment of the methodological strengths of our work. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions that will be incorporated.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (hierarchical forecasting framework) and the abstract: the reported σ(w0) ∼ 0.45 rests on the premise that ∼10^5 PDSPL pairs with self-similar deflectors can be photometrically selected and modeled such that the distance-ratio information remains unbiased after marginalization over the MSD parameter. No explicit mock-catalog validation or selection-function derivation is shown demonstrating that redshift-dependent selection or imperfect self-similarity matching does not couple to the MSD marginalization and degrade or bias the forecast; this assumption is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that the central numerical forecast assumes an idealized photometric selection of PDSPLs in which self-similarity matching and redshift information preserve unbiased distance ratios after MSD marginalization. The manuscript develops the hierarchical statistical framework under this assumption rather than deriving a full end-to-end selection function. We will revise §4 and the abstract to state this assumption explicitly as a modeling caveat and to note that future work incorporating detailed mock catalogs will be required to quantify any residual selection-induced biases. This revision qualifies the forecast without altering the hierarchical methodology or the demonstration that volume can dominate precision. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Table 1] Table 1 (or equivalent forecast summary table): the claim that the photometric sample outperforms spectroscopic subsets is presented as a key result, yet the table entries for the spectroscopic case appear to use a fixed smaller N without showing the corresponding hierarchical posterior widths when the same MSD and slope parameters are jointly fit; this comparison is central to the argument that volume dominates precision.

    Authors: The spectroscopic entries in Table 1 were generated with the same hierarchical model (joint marginalization over MSD and power-law slope) but with sample sizes reduced to reflect realistic spectroscopic follow-up yields. To make the comparison fully transparent, we will revise Table 1 (or add a supplementary table) to report the explicit posterior widths on w0, MSD, and slope for the spectroscopic cases under the identical hierarchical setup. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; forecasts derive from explicit hierarchical model assumptions without reduction to inputs by construction

full rationale

The paper's central results are forward forecasts of parameter constraints (e.g., σ(w0) ∼ 0.45) obtained by propagating an assumed Flat w0waCDM cosmology, lens population statistics, and a hierarchical model that treats the MSD parameter as a free nuisance to be jointly marginalized. No equation or section reduces the reported σ(w0) to a fitted input renamed as output, nor does any load-bearing premise collapse to a self-citation chain or self-definitional loop. The PDSPL construction is explicitly motivated as removing the intermediate-source MSD by design, and the forecasting framework is presented as a statistical propagation rather than an empirical fit. External priors (e.g., N(0.3,0.05) on Ωm) are stated as optional additions, not internal to the derivation. This is a standard forecasting exercise whose validity hinges on modeling assumptions rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard flat w0waCDM cosmology assumption and the operational definition of PDSPLs; no new physical entities are postulated, but the forecasting framework introduces fitted parameters for MSD and power-law slope.

free parameters (2)
  • MSD parameter
    Incorporated into the hierarchical forecasting framework and jointly constrained with w0.
  • deflector power-law slope
    Constrained simultaneously to ~2% precision in the forecast.
assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Flat w0waCDM cosmology
    Used as the background model for all dark-energy forecasts.
invented entities (1)
  • Pseudo Double-Source Plane Lenses (PDSPLs)
    purpose: To generalize DSPL tomography to large samples of independent single-source lenses
    Defined in the abstract as pairs of independent single-source plane lenses with self-similar deflectors; no independent evidence provided for their abundance or clean identifiability.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strong Lensing Tomography: Double and pseudo multi-source plane strong gravitational lensing to constrain dark energy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7UIBULIS

@misc{pith2026260701005,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strong Lensing Tomography: Double and pseudo multi-source plane strong gravitational lensing to constrain dark energy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7UIBULIS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.01005}
}
abstract

Tomographic measurements of gravitational lensing with different lens and source redshift distributions contain crucial information about the universe's relative expansion rate, and hence dark energy. While this technique is well-established in weak lensing, its application to strong lensing has traditionally focused on Double Source Plane Lenses (DSPLs). However, DSPLs are exceedingly rare and fundamentally limited by the Mass-Sheet Degeneracy (MSD), a systematic uncertainty underexplored in previous literature. To overcome these challenges, we introduce Pseudo Double-Source Plane Lenses (PDSPLs): pairs of independent single-source plane lenses with self-similar deflectors. This generalizes the DSPL formalism to the $\sim 10^5$ galaxy-galaxy lenses expected from upcoming surveys like LSST, Euclid, and Roman. Unlike true DSPLs, PDSPLs are free from the intermediate source mass problem by construction, eliminating the associated secondary MSD and the need for multi-plane ray tracing. We incorporate the deflector galaxy's MSD into a hierarchical forecasting framework, demonstrating that this degeneracy severely degrades constraints from small DSPL samples, thus motivating our PDSPL statistical approach. We forecast constraints on the dark energy equation of state under a Flat $w_0w_a$CDM cosmology. The LSST 10-year photometric sample alone achieves $\sigma(w_0) \sim 0.45$, while simultaneously constraining the MSD parameter and deflector power-law slope to $\sim 2\%$. Adding a prior $\mathcal{N}(0.3, 0.05)$ on $\Omega_{\rm m}$ -- simulating combination with external probes like CMB, BAO, or SNe Ia -- tightens this to $\sigma(w_0) \sim 0.29$, competitive with current Stage III weak lensing analyses. Notably, this massive photometric sample outperforms smaller subsets with precise spectroscopic follow-up (e.g., from 4MOST), confirming statistical volume dominates over per-pair precision.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 86 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations

    A.G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D.M. Alexander, M. Alvarez et al.,DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations,JCAP2025 (2025) 021 [2404.03002]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Dynamical Dark Energy and the Unresolved Hubble Tension: Multi-model Constraints from DESI 2025 and Other Probes

    Z. Zhang, T. Xu and Y. Chen,Dynamical Dark Energy and the Unresolved Hubble Tension: Multi-model Constraints from DESI 2025 and Other Probes,ApJ999(2026) 248 [2512.07281]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    de Cruz P´ erez, A

    J. de Cruz Pérez, A. Gómez-Valent and J. Solà Peracaula,Dynamical dark energy models in light of the latest observations,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 083521 [2512.20616]

    work page arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

    In the Realm of the Hubble tension $-$ a Review of Solutions

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri et al.,In the realm of the Hubble tension-a review of solutions,Classical and Quantum Gravity38(2021) 153001 [2103.01183]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Cosmology Intertwined: A Review of the Particle Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology Associated with the Cosmological Tensions and Anomalies

    E. Abdalla, G.F. Abellán, A. Aboubrahim, A. Agnello, Ö. Akarsu, Y. Akrami et al.,Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies,Journal of High Energy Astrophysics34(2022) 49 [2203.06142]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Accelerating Universes with Scaling Dark Matter

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski,Accelerating Universes with Scaling Dark Matter,International Journal of Modern Physics D10(2001) 213 [gr-qc/0009008]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2001

  7. [7]

    Cosmic Structure Growth and Dark Energy

    E.V. Linder and A. Jenkins,Cosmic structure growth and dark energy,MNRAS346(2003) 573 [astro-ph/0305286]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    The Limits of Quintessence

    R.R. Caldwell and E.V. Linder,Limits of Quintessence,Phys. Rev. Lett.95(2005) 141301 [astro-ph/0505494]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2005

Show all 86 references
  1. [9]

    Singh and P

    S. Singh and P. Singh,It’s a dark, dark world: background evolution of interacting phiCDM models beyond simple exponential potentials,JCAP2016(2016) 017 [1507.01535]. – 31 –

    2016 arXiv

  2. [10]

    G.-B. Zhao, M. Raveri, L. Pogosian, Y. Wang, R.G. Crittenden, W.J. Handley et al.,Dynamical dark energy in light of the latest observations,Nature Astronomy1(2017) 627 [1701.08165]

    2017 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Jain and A

    B. Jain and A. Taylor,Cross-Correlation Tomography: Measuring Dark Energy Evolution with Weak Lensing,PRL91(2003) 141302 [astro-ph/0306046]

    2003 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Hu,Dark energy and matter evolution from lensing tomography,Phys

    W. Hu,Dark energy and matter evolution from lensing tomography,Phys. Rev. D66(2002) 083515 [astro-ph/0208093]

    2002 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Abbott, M

    Dark Energy Survey and Kilo-Degree Survey Collaboration, T.M.C. Abbott, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon, O. Alves, A. Amon et al.,DES Y3 + KiDS-1000: Consistent cosmology combining cosmic shear surveys,The Open Journal of Astrophysics6(2023) 36 [2305.17173]

    2023

  6. [14]

    Jullo, P

    E. Jullo, P. Natarajan, J.-P. Kneib, A. D’Aloisio, M. Limousin, J. Richard et al.,Cosmological constraints from strong gravitational lensing in clusters of galaxies.,Science329(2010) 924 [1008.4802]

    2010 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Caminha, S.H

    G.B. Caminha, S.H. Suyu, C. Grillo and P. Rosati,Galaxy cluster strong lensing cosmography. Cosmological constraints from a sample of regular galaxy clusters,A&A657(2022) A83 [2110.06232]

    2022

  8. [16]

    Gavazzi, T

    R. Gavazzi, T. Treu, L.V.E. Koopmans, A.S. Bolton, L.A. Moustakas, S. Burles et al.,The Sloan Lens ACS Survey. VI. Discovery and Analysis of a Double Einstein Ring,ApJ677 (2008) 1046 [0801.1555]

    2008 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Collett and M.W

    T.E. Collett and M.W. Auger,Cosmological constraints from the double source plane lens SDSSJ0946+1006,MNRAS443(2014) 969 [1403.5278]

    2014 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Johnson, T

    D. Johnson, T. Collett, T. Li and P. Fleury,Line-of-sight effects on double source plane lenses, arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2501.17153 [2501.17153]

    2025

  11. [19]

    Sahu, A.J

    N. Sahu, A.J. Shajib, K.-V. Tran, H. Skobe, S. Rhoades, T. Jones et al.,Cosmography with the Double-source-plane Strong Gravitational Lens AGEL150745+052256,ApJ991(2025) 72 [2504.00656]

    2025

  12. [20]

    Bowden, N

    D.J. Bowden, N. Sahu, A.J. Shajib, K.-V. Tran, T.M. Barone, K.V. G. C. et al.,Constraining Cosmology with Double-source-plane Strong Gravitational Lenses from the AGEL Survey,ApJ 993(2025) 124 [2509.15012]

    2025

  13. [21]

    Tanaka, K.C

    M. Tanaka, K.C. Wong, A. More, A. Dezuka, E. Egami, M. Oguri et al.,A Spectroscopically Confirmed Double Source Plane Lens System in the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program,ApJL826(2016) L19 [1606.09363]

    2016 arXiv

  14. [22]

    HST Imaging of the Eye of Horus, a Double Source Plane Gravitational Lens

    K. Wong, “HST Imaging of the Eye of Horus, a Double Source Plane Gravitational Lens.” HST Proposal id.15325. Cycle 25, Aug., 2017

    2017

  15. [23]

    Tanaka, A

    K. Tanaka, A. Tsuji, H. Akamatsu, J.H.H. Chan, J. Coupon, E. Egami et al.,X-ray study of the double source plane gravitational lens system Eye of Horus observed with XMM-Newton, MNRAS491(2020) 3411 [1911.04805]

    2020

  16. [24]

    F. Dux, M. Millon, C. Lemon, T. Schmidt, F. Courbin, A.J. Shajib et al.,J1721+8842: The first Einstein zigzag lens,A&A694(2025) A300 [2411.04177]

    2025

  17. [25]

    Collaboration, T

    E. Collaboration, T. Li, T.E. Collett, M. Walmsley, N.E.P. Lines, K. Rojas et al.,Euclid quick data release (q1). the strong lensing discovery engine d – double-source-plane lens candidates, 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Ivezić, S.M

    Ž. Ivezić, S.M. Kahn, J.A. Tyson, B. Abel, E. Acosta, R. Allsman et al.,LSST: From Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products,ApJ873(2019) 111 [0805.2366]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Laureijs, J

    R. Laureijs, J. Amiaux, S. Arduini, J.L. Auguères, J. Brinchmann, R. Cole et al.,Euclid Definition Study Report,arXiv e-prints(2011) arXiv:1110.3193 [1110.3193]. – 32 –

    2011 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Spergel, N

    D. Spergel, N. Gehrels, C. Baltay, D. Bennett, J. Breckinridge, M. Donahue et al.,Wide-Field InfrarRed Survey Telescope-Astrophysics Focused Telescope Assets WFIRST-AFTA 2015 Report,arXiv e-prints(2015) arXiv:1503.03757 [1503.03757]

    2015 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Collett,The Population of Galaxy-Galaxy Strong Lenses in Forthcoming Optical Imaging Surveys,ApJ811(2015) 20 [1507.02657]

    T.E. Collett,The Population of Galaxy-Galaxy Strong Lenses in Forthcoming Optical Imaging Surveys,ApJ811(2015) 20 [1507.02657]

    2015 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Shajib, G.P

    A.J. Shajib, G.P. Smith, S. Birrer, A. Verma, N. Arendse, T. Collett et al.,Strong gravitational lenses from the Vera C. Rubin Observatory,Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A383(2025) 20240117 [2406.08919]

    2025

  23. [31]

    Ferrami and J.S.B

    G. Ferrami and J.S.B. Wyithe,A model for galaxy-galaxy strong lensing statistics in surveys, MNRAS532(2024) 1832 [2404.03143]

    2024

  24. [32]

    Wedig, T

    B. Wedig, T. Daylan, S. Birrer, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, C. Dvorkin, D.P. Finkbeiner et al.,The Roman View of Strong Gravitational Lenses,ApJ986(2025) 42 [2506.03390]

    2025

  25. [33]

    Falco, M.V

    E.E. Falco, M.V. Gorenstein and I.I. Shapiro,On model-dependent bounds on H 0 from gravitational images : application to Q 0957+561 A, B.,ApJL289(1985) L1

    1985

  26. [34]

    Schneider,Can one determine cosmological parameters from multi-plane strong lens systems?,A&A568(2014) L2 [1406.6152]

    P. Schneider,Can one determine cosmological parameters from multi-plane strong lens systems?,A&A568(2014) L2 [1406.6152]

    2014 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Birrer, A.J

    S. Birrer, A.J. Shajib, A. Galan, M. Millon, T. Treu, A. Agnello et al.,TDCOSMO. IV. Hierarchical time-delay cosmography - joint inference of the Hubble constant and galaxy density profiles,A&A643(2020) A165 [2007.02941]

    2020

  28. [36]

    Khadka, S

    N. Khadka, S. Birrer, A. Leauthaud and H. Nix,Breaking the mass-sheet degeneracy in strong lensing mass modelling with weak lensing observations,MNRAS533(2024) 795 [2404.01513]

    2024

  29. [37]

    Gorenstein, E.E

    M.V. Gorenstein, E.E. Falco and I.I. Shapiro,Degeneracies in Parameter Estimates for Models of Gravitational Lens Systems,ApJ327(1988) 693

    1988

  30. [38]

    Schneider and D

    P. Schneider and D. Sluse,Mass-sheet degeneracy, power-law models and external convergence: Impact on the determination of the Hubble constant from gravitational lensing,A&A559 (2013) A37 [1306.0901]

    2013 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Birrer, A

    S. Birrer, A. Amara and A. Refregier,The mass-sheet degeneracy and time-delay cosmography: analysis of the strong lens RXJ1131-1231,JCAP2016(2016) 020 [1511.03662]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Sonnenfeld,On the choice of lens density profile in time delay cosmography,MNRAS474 (2018) 4648 [1710.05925]

    A. Sonnenfeld,On the choice of lens density profile in time delay cosmography,MNRAS474 (2018) 4648 [1710.05925]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Kochanek,Overconstrained gravitational lens models and the Hubble constant,MNRAS 493(2020) 1725 [1911.05083]

    C.S. Kochanek,Overconstrained gravitational lens models and the Hubble constant,MNRAS 493(2020) 1725 [1911.05083]

    2020

  34. [42]

    Auger, T

    M.W. Auger, T. Treu, A.S. Bolton, R. Gavazzi, L.V.E. Koopmans, P.J. Marshall et al.,The Sloan Lens ACS Survey. X. Stellar, Dynamical, and Total Mass Correlations of Massive Early-type Galaxies,ApJ724(2010) 511 [1007.2880]

    2010 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Mozumdar, S

    P. Mozumdar, S. Knabel, T. Treu, A. Sonnenfeld, A.J. Shajib, M. Cappellari et al.,XXII. Accurate stellar velocity dispersions of the SL2S lens sample and the lensing mass fundamental plane,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2505.13962 [2505.13962]

    2025

  36. [44]

    Abell, J

    LSST Science Collaboration, P.A. Abell, J. Allison, S.F. Anderson, J.R. Andrew, J.R.P. Angel et al.,LSST Science Book, Version 2.0,arXiv e-prints(2009) arXiv:0912.0201 [0912.0201]

    2009 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Collett, A

    T.E. Collett, A. Sonnenfeld, C. Frohmaier, K. Glazebrook, D. Sluse, V. Motta et al.,The 4MOST Strong Lensing Spectroscopic Legacy Survey (4SLSLS),The Messenger190(2023) 49

    2023

  38. [46]

    Djorgovski and M

    S. Djorgovski and M. Davis,Fundamental Properties of Elliptical Galaxies,ApJ313(1987) 59

    1987

  39. [47]

    Dressler, D

    A. Dressler, D. Lynden-Bell, D. Burstein, R.L. Davies, S.M. Faber, R. Terlevich et al., Spectroscopy and Photometry of Elliptical Galaxies. I. New Distance Estimator,ApJ313 (1987) 42. – 33 –

    1987

  40. [48]

    Faber and R.E

    S.M. Faber and R.E. Jackson,Velocity dispersions and mass-to-light ratios for elliptical galaxies.,ApJ204(1976) 668

    1976

  41. [49]

    Kormendy,Brightness distributions in compact and normal galaxies

    J. Kormendy,Brightness distributions in compact and normal galaxies. II. Structure parameters of the spheroidal component.,ApJ218(1977) 333

    1977

  42. [50]

    Bower, J.R

    R.G. Bower, J.R. Lucey and R.S. Ellis,Precision photometry of early-type galaxies in the Coma and Virgo clusters : a test of the universality of the colour-magnitude relation - I. The data., MNRAS254(1992) 589

    1992

  43. [51]

    Gallazzi, S

    A. Gallazzi, S. Charlot, J. Brinchmann, S.D.M. White and C.A. Tremonti,The ages and metallicities of galaxies in the local universe,MNRAS362(2005) 41 [astro-ph/0506539]

    2005 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Ferrarese and D

    L. Ferrarese and D. Merritt,A Fundamental Relation between Supermassive Black Holes and Their Host Galaxies,ApJL539(2000) L9 [astro-ph/0006053]

    2000 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Gebhardt, R

    K. Gebhardt, R. Bender, G. Bower, A. Dressler, S.M. Faber, A.V. Filippenko et al.,A Relationship between Nuclear Black Hole Mass and Galaxy Velocity Dispersion,ApJL539 (2000) L13 [astro-ph/0006289]

    2000 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Bolton, S

    A.S. Bolton, S. Burles, T. Treu, L.V.E. Koopmans and L.A. Moustakas,A More Fundamental Plane,ApJL665(2007) L105 [astro-ph/0701706]

    2007 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Gargiulo, C.P

    A. Gargiulo, C.P. Haines, P. Merluzzi, R.J. Smith, F. La Barbera, G. Busarello et al.,On the origin of the scatter around the Fundamental Plane: correlations with stellar population parameters,MNRAS397(2009) 75 [0902.4383]

    2009 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Desroches, E

    L.-B. Desroches, E. Quataert, C.-P. Ma and A.A. West,Luminosity dependence in the Fundamental Plane projections of elliptical galaxies,MNRAS377(2007) 402 [astro-ph/0608474]

    2007 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Khadka, S

    N. Khadka, S. Birrer, H. Best, P. Sharma, K.T. Abe, X. Tang et al.,SLSim: a strong lensing population simulation package,arXiv e-prints(2026) arXiv:2603.17138 [2603.17138]

    2026 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Schechter,An analytic expression for the luminosity function for galaxies.,ApJ203(1976) 297

    P. Schechter,An analytic expression for the luminosity function for galaxies.,ApJ203(1976) 297

    1976

  51. [59]

    Amara, L

    A. Amara, L. de la Bella, S. Birrer, S. Bridle, J. Cordero, G. Favole et al.,SkyPy: A package for modelling the Universe,The Journal of Open Source Software6(2021) 3056 [2109.06172]

    2021

  52. [60]

    Bernardi, F

    M. Bernardi, F. Shankar, J.B. Hyde, S. Mei, F. Marulli and R.K. Sheth,Galaxy luminosities, stellar masses, sizes, velocity dispersions as a function of morphological type,MNRAS404 (2010) 2087 [0910.1093]

    2010 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Holloway, A

    P. Holloway, A. Verma, P.J. Marshall, A. More and M. Tecza,On the detectability of strong lensing in near-infrared surveys,MNRAS525(2023) 2341 [2308.00851]

    2023

  54. [62]

    Birrer and A

    S. Birrer and A. Amara,lenstronomy: Multi-purpose gravitational lens modelling software package,Physics of the Dark Universe22(2018) 189 [1803.09746]

    2018 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Birrer, A

    S. Birrer, A. Shajib, D. Gilman, A. Galan, J. Aalbers, M. Millon et al.,lenstronomy II: A gravitational lensing software ecosystem,The Journal of Open Source Software6(2021) 3283 [2106.05976]

    2021

  56. [64]

    T. Li, T.E. Collett, C.M. Krawczyk and W. Enzi,Cosmology from large populations of galaxy-galaxy strong gravitational lenses,MNRAS527(2024) 5311 [2307.09271]

    2024

  57. [65]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T.E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau et al., SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python,Nature Methods17 (2020) 261

    2020

  58. [66]

    Smith and T.E

    R.J. Smith and T.E. Collett,A fully-spectroscopic triple-source-plane lens: the Jackpot completed,MNRAS505(2021) 2136 [2104.12790]. – 34 –

    2021

  59. [67]

    Cowan, K

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross and O. Vitells,Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics,European Physical Journal C71(2011) 1554 [1007.1727]

    2011 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Collett and D.J

    T.E. Collett and D.J. Bacon,Compound lensing: Einstein zig-zags and high-multiplicity lensed images,MNRAS456(2016) 2210 [1510.00242]

    2016 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Herle, C.M

    A. Herle, C.M. O’Riordan and S. Vegetti,Selection functions of strong lens finding neural networks,MNRAS534(2024) 1093 [2307.10355]

    2024

  62. [70]

    Cañameras, S

    R. Cañameras, S. Schuldt, Y. Shu, S.H. Suyu, S. Taubenberger, I.T. Andika et al., HOLISMOKES: XI. Evaluation of supervised neural networks for strong-lens searches in ground-based imaging surveys,A&A692(2024) A72 [2306.03136]

    2024

  63. [71]

    Silver, R

    E. Silver, R. Wang, X. Huang, A.S. Bolton, C.J. Storfer and S. Banka,ML-driven Strong Lens Discoveries: Down toθ E∼0.′′03 and Mhalo <10 11M⊙,ApJ994(2025) 117 [2507.01943]

    2025

  64. [72]

    Capak, J.-C

    P. Capak, J.-C. Cuillandre, F. Bernardeau, F. Castander, R. Bowler, C. Chang et al., Enhancing LSST Science with Euclid Synergy,arXiv e-prints(2019) arXiv:1904.10439 [1904.10439]

    2019 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Observations Time Allocation Committee and C

    R. Observations Time Allocation Committee and C. Community Survey Definition Committees,Roman Observations Time Allocation Committee: Final Report and Recommendations,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2505.10574 [2505.10574]

    2025

  66. [74]

    G. Kaur, M. Bilicki, S. Bellstedt, E. Tempel, W.A. Hellwing, I. Baldry et al.,Wide Area VISTA Extragalactic Survey (WAVES): Selection of targets for the Wide survey using decision-tree classification,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2510.11132 [2510.11132]

    2025

  67. [75]

    Mainieri, R.I

    V. Mainieri, R.I. Anderson, J. Brinchmann, A. Cimatti, R.S. Ellis, V. Hill et al.,The Wide-field Spectroscopic Telescope (WST) Science White Paper,arXiv e-prints(2024) arXiv:2403.05398 [2403.05398]

    2024

  68. [76]

    Bernardi, R.K

    M. Bernardi, R.K. Sheth, J. Annis, S. Burles, D.J. Eisenstein, D.P. Finkbeiner et al., Early-type Galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. II. Correlations between Observables,AJ 125(2003) 1849 [astro-ph/0301624]

    2003 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Mahalanobis,On the Generalised Distance in Statistics.,Sankhya A80(2018) 1–7

    P. Mahalanobis,On the Generalised Distance in Statistics.,Sankhya A80(2018) 1–7

    2018

  70. [78]

    Aghanim, Y

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,A&A641(2020) A6 [1807.06209]

    2018 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Brout, D

    D. Brout, D. Scolnic, B. Popovic, A.G. Riess, A. Carr, J. Zuntz et al.,The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints,ApJ938(2022) 110 [2202.04077]

    2022 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Kauffmann, T.M

    G. Kauffmann, T.M. Heckman, C. Tremonti, J. Brinchmann, S. Charlot, S.D.M. White et al., The host galaxies of active galactic nuclei,MNRAS346(2003) 1055 [astro-ph/0304239]

    2003 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Koopmans, A

    L.V.E. Koopmans, A. Bolton, T. Treu, O. Czoske, M.W. Auger, M. Barnabè et al.,The Structure and Dynamics of Massive Early-Type Galaxies: On Homology, Isothermality, and Isotropy Inside One Effective Radius,ApJL703(2009) L51 [0906.1349]

    2009 arXiv

  74. [82]

    de Jong, O

    R.S. de Jong, O. Bellido-Tirado, C. Chiappini, É. Depagne, R. Haynes, D. Johl et al.,4MOST: 4-metre multi-object spectroscopic telescope, inGround-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV, I.S. McLean, S.K. Ramsay and H. Takami, eds., vol. 8446 ofSociety of Photo-Op...

    2012 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Erickson, M

    S. Erickson, M. Millon, P. Venkatraman, T. Li, P. Holloway, P. Marshall et al.,Investigating the Dark Energy Constraint from Strongly Lensed AGN at LSST-Scale,arXiv e-prints(2025) arXiv:2511.13669 [2511.13669]

    2025

  76. [84]

    Sharma, T.E

    D. Sharma, T.E. Collett and E.V. Linder,Testing cosmology with double source lensing,JCAP 2023(2023) 001 [2212.00055]. – 35 –

    2023

  77. [85]

    Abbott, M

    T.M.C. Abbott, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon, S. Allam, O. Alves, A. Amon et al.,Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 023520 [2105.13549]

    2022 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Fixed Scatter

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D.W. Hogg, D. Lang and J. Goodman,emcee: The mcmc hammer,PASP 125(2013) 306 [1202.3665]. – 36 – T able 4. Cosmological forecast constraints for the PDSPL samples and 500 DSPLs. SampleΩ m w0 wa λMST σ(λMST) γpl σ(γpl) TRUTH 0.30 -1.00 0.00 1.000 0.050 2.078 0...

    2013 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed July 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.