REVIEW 1 cited by
Weak lensing of strong lensing: beyond the tidal regime
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
The analysis of strong lensing images usually involves an external convergence and shear, which are meant to model the effect of perturbations along the line of sight, on top of the main lens. Such a description of line-of-sight perturbations supposes that the corresponding gravitational fields can be treated in the tidal regime. Going one step further introduces additional effects, known as flexion, which have been hitherto neglected in strong lensing. In this work, we build a minimal model for the line-of-sight flexion, which adds four new complex parameters to the lens model. Contrary to convergence and shear, the line-of-sight flexion cannot be projected onto the main lens plane. For a $\Lambda$CDM cosmology, we predict the typical line-of-sight flexion to be on the order of $10^{-3} \mathrm{arcsec}^{-1}$ on galactic scales. Neglecting its effect in lens modelling is found to bias the recovery of other parameters; in particular, the line-of-sight shear can be biased up to $2\sigma$. Accounting for the line-of-sight flexion in our minimal framework restores accuracy, at the the cost of degrading precision. With current imaging capabilities, the line-of-sight flexion is unlikely to be measurable on individual strong lensing images; it must therefore be considered a nuisance parameter rather than an observable in its own right.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Line-of-sight shear in SLACS strong lenses I: shear and mass model parametrisations
The first measurement of line of sight shear in 23 real strong lenses gives a typical magnitude of about 0.056, larger than expectations from N-body simulations.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.