pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.20561 · v2 · submitted 2025-10-23 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA · astro-ph.CO· astro-ph.IM

Strong Lensing Model and Dust Extinction Maps of the Host Galaxy of Type Ia Supernova H0pe

A. Galan , S. Schuldt , G. B. Caminha , S. H. Suyu , R. Ca\~nameras , S. Ertl , C. Grillo , A. Acebron
show 6 more authors
B. Frye A. M. Koekemoer M. Pascale R. Windhorst J. M. Diego N. Foo
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 04:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.COastro-ph.IM
keywords strong gravitational lensingType Ia supernovadust extinctiongalaxy clusterJWSThost galaxymass modelingextended image modeling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Including the extended surface brightness of the SN H0pe host galaxy reduces uncertainties in the strong lensing model of cluster G165 by more than an order of magnitude.

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

The paper constructs a strong lensing model of the galaxy cluster PLCK G165.7+67.0 first using only the positions of multiple images of background galaxies. It then adds a large number of constraints by modeling the extended surface brightness distribution of the host galaxy of the Type Ia supernova H0pe at redshift 1.78. This step reduces the average uncertainty on the cluster mass model parameters by more than a factor of ten. The resulting model is further used to reconstruct the dust distribution in the source plane and to measure the extinction at the supernova position, which agrees with independent spectral energy distribution fitting methods to within 1 sigma. A reader would care because tighter lens models support more precise cosmological measurements with lensed supernovae and enable resolved studies of dust in distant galaxies.

Core claim

By modeling the extended surface brightness of the host galaxy in addition to the positions of multiple images, the strong lensing model of G165 achieves more than an order of magnitude reduction in the average uncertainty on its mass model parameters. The model further permits mapping the dust extinction across the host galaxy from the image plane to the source plane, placing the supernova in a region with A_V ≈ 0.9 mag about 1 kpc from the center, in statistical agreement with three independent SED-based estimates.

What carries the argument

Extended-image modeling of the lensed host galaxy surface brightness, which supplies many additional constraints on the lens mass distribution independent of the image positions.

If this is right

  • Improved precision in strong lensing mass models for clusters hosting lensed supernovae.
  • Ability to map dust extinction spatially in the source plane of high-redshift galaxies.
  • More accurate extinction corrections for the luminosity of lensed Type Ia supernovae.
  • Advancement toward using strongly lensed SNe in future cosmological analyses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar extended modeling could be applied to other lensed transients to refine cluster mass maps without new data.
  • This technique may help tighten constraints on the Hubble constant from time-delay cosmography in lensing clusters.
  • Routine application to future JWST lensed-SN discoveries would enable statistical samples of dust maps in z>1.5 galaxies.

Load-bearing premise

The extended surface brightness distribution of the SN host galaxy supplies additional constraints that are independent of the multiple-image positions and free from significant systematic bias due to dust or source reconstruction errors.

What would settle it

New observations or a re-analysis in which adding the extended surface brightness data fails to reduce the reported parameter uncertainties by an order of magnitude or produces an extinction value at the supernova site that differs by more than 1 sigma from the SED fitting results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.20561 by A. Acebron, A. Galan, A. M. Koekemoer, B. Frye, C. Grillo, G. B. Caminha, J. M. Diego, M. Pascale, N. Foo, R. Ca\~nameras, R. Windhorst, S. Ertl, S. H. Suyu, S. Schuldt.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: JWST color composite image of G165 (where the combination for blue is F090W + F115W + F150W; green is F200W + F277W and red is F356W + F410M + F444W). White crosses indicate the position of point-like multiple images used as model constraints (presented in Frye et al. 2024). The magenta contour outlines the mask used to model the surface brightness of the SN H0pe host (Arc 2, composed of the SN host images… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Joint posterior distribution of the mass parameters for the two cluster-scale components. Contours are the 68% and 95% confidence levels for the model using only the point-like images as constraints (red) and the one including the full surface brightness of SN H0pe host galaxy (blue). from the data likelihood term. Compared to our position-based model of Sect. 3.1, our extended-image model contains both ad… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Color composite of the reconstructed source-plane image of the SN H0pe host galaxy (z = 1.78). The filters F090W, F150W and F200W correspond to the blue, green and red channels, respectively. The white star indicates the position of SN H0pe. The pixel scale is 0′′ .048. ment the lensing constraints. Alternatively extra degrees of free￾dom could also be introduced in the cluster-scale components, such as mu… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Image-plane dust extinction map of SN H0pe host galaxy. Left panel: dust extinction map within the arc mask and at the resolution of the F444W data, which is also shown in grayscale (see Sect. 4.2 for more details). The dashed line rectangles indicate the zoom-in regions of the middle and right panels. These panels show the F200W data in grayscale and corresponding isophotes (logarithmically spaced), showi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Top panel: Dust extinction map of SN H0pe host galaxy, recon￾structed in the source plane based on our extended-image lens model. The green star shows the position of the SN with respect to its host, whose (logarithmically spaced) isophotes are indicated with thin black contours. We note the consistency between the perturbed isophotes and the dust extinction map. The bottommost high-extinction feature (∼ 3… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Strong gravitational lensing by massive galaxy clusters offers rare opportunities to observe multiple images of distant ($z \gtrsim 2$) Type Ia supernovae (SNe) and to resolve the properties of their host galaxies. A recent outstanding example is the Type Ia SN H0pe ($z = 1.78$), which the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) discovered in NIRCam images, when the galaxy cluster PLCK G165.7+67.0 (G165, $z = 0.35$) still produced three images of it. In this work, we build a new strong lensing model of G165, first using only the positions of multiple images of background galaxies. We then significantly increase the number of constraints around the position of SN H0pe by modeling the extended surface brightness of the SN host galaxy. Including extended image information reduces the average uncertainty on mass model parameters by more than an order of magnitude. We also study the spatial distribution of dust in the arc to estimate the dust extinction at the position of SN H0pe. We find good statistical agreement of the extinction estimate, at $\lesssim 1\sigma$, with three fully independent methods based on spectral energy distribution fitting. Moreover, our extended-image lens model of G165 allows us to map the dust distribution of the host galaxy from the image plane to the source plane. Supernova H0pe exploded in a region with a relatively high extinction ($A_V \approx 0.9$ mag) at around $\sim 1$ kpc from its host center. This work shows that extended image modeling in lensing clusters simultaneously reduces the uncertainty on lens model parameters and enables spatially resolved analyses of lensed transients' host galaxies. Such modeling advances are expected to play an important role in future cosmological analyses using strongly lensed SNe.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a strong lensing model for the galaxy cluster PLCK G165.7+67.0 (G165) at z=0.35, initially constrained by multiple-image positions of background galaxies and then refined by modeling the extended surface brightness of the host galaxy of the Type Ia supernova H0pe at z=1.78. The authors report that adding the extended-image constraints reduces the average uncertainty on lens mass model parameters by more than an order of magnitude. They further derive spatially resolved dust extinction maps in the host, finding A_V ≈ 0.9 mag near the SN position (~1 kpc from center), with statistical agreement at ≲1σ to three independent SED-based extinction estimates, and demonstrate source-plane mapping of the dust distribution.

Significance. If the reported uncertainty reduction is robust to alternative source parametrizations and free of unaccounted covariances, the work demonstrates a practical advance in strong-lensing methodology that simultaneously tightens cluster mass models and enables resolved host-galaxy analyses for lensed transients. The cross-validation with independent extinction methods adds credibility to the dust-mapping component and supports the broader claim that extended-image modeling will be important for future cosmological applications of strongly lensed SNe Ia.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (Lens Modeling) and associated figures/tables: The central claim that extended surface-brightness constraints reduce average mass-model parameter uncertainties by more than an order of magnitude is load-bearing, yet the manuscript does not present a direct side-by-side comparison of the posterior widths (or covariance matrices) obtained with versus without the extended-image constraints. Without this explicit quantification and a statement of the number of additional independent constraints introduced, it remains unclear whether the reported reduction arises from genuinely new information or from implicit regularization and parameter correlations in the joint source-lens-dust fit.
  2. [§4] §4 (Dust Extinction Mapping): The statistical agreement at ≲1σ with three independent SED-based methods is presented, but the paper does not report robustness tests of the mass-model posterior widths under alternative source parametrizations or different dust priors. Given that the lens model, source reconstruction, and dust map appear to be fit jointly, the possibility that unaccounted covariances artificially narrow the reported uncertainties on the mass parameters (and therefore on the derived extinction at the SN position) needs to be addressed explicitly.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §2] The abstract and §2 would benefit from a brief statement of the total number of multiple-image systems and the number of extended-image pixels or constraints added around SN H0pe, to allow readers to gauge the increase in constraint density.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the extinction maps should explicitly state the assumed extinction law and the wavelength range over which A_V is derived, to facilitate direct comparison with the SED-based methods.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments. These have highlighted areas where the presentation of our results can be strengthened. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to include the requested direct comparisons and robustness tests.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (Lens Modeling) and associated figures/tables: The central claim that extended surface-brightness constraints reduce average mass-model parameter uncertainties by more than an order of magnitude is load-bearing, yet the manuscript does not present a direct side-by-side comparison of the posterior widths (or covariance matrices) obtained with versus without the extended-image constraints. Without this explicit quantification and a statement of the number of additional independent constraints introduced, it remains unclear whether the reported reduction arises from genuinely new information or from implicit regularization and parameter correlations in the joint source-lens-dust fit.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit side-by-side comparison is essential to substantiate the central claim. In the revised manuscript we will add a new table that reports the posterior widths (1σ uncertainties) and selected elements of the covariance matrix for the primary lens mass parameters (e.g., halo masses, ellipticities, core radii) obtained from the position-only model versus the extended-image model. We will also state the number of additional independent constraints contributed by the extended surface-brightness data. Both models use identical parametrization, priors, and optimization settings, so the comparison isolates the effect of the new information rather than differences in regularization or implicit correlations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4 (Dust Extinction Mapping): The statistical agreement at ≲1σ with three independent SED-based methods is presented, but the paper does not report robustness tests of the mass-model posterior widths under alternative source parametrizations or different dust priors. Given that the lens model, source reconstruction, and dust map appear to be fit jointly, the possibility that unaccounted covariances artificially narrow the reported uncertainties on the mass parameters (and therefore on the derived extinction at the SN position) needs to be addressed explicitly.

    Authors: We acknowledge the value of explicit robustness checks for the joint fit. In the revision we will add a new subsection (or appendix) that presents two sets of tests: (i) alternative source parametrizations (varying the number of Gaussian components or shapelet orders while keeping the lens model fixed), and (ii) different dust priors (flat versus Gaussian centered on the SED-derived values). For each case we will report the resulting changes in the mass-parameter posterior widths and in the derived A_V at the SN position. These tests will demonstrate that the reported uncertainties are stable and not artificially narrowed by unaccounted covariances. The existing ≲1σ agreement with three independent SED-based extinction estimates already provides external validation, but the new tests will make the robustness explicit. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the lensing model or extinction analysis

full rationale

The derivation begins with a standard strong-lensing model constrained solely by multiple-image positions of background galaxies, then augments the constraint set by explicitly modeling the extended surface brightness of the SN host galaxy around SN H0pe. The reported order-of-magnitude reduction in average parameter uncertainty follows directly from the addition of independent pixel-level constraints and is presented as an empirical outcome rather than a definitional identity. Dust-extinction maps derived from the joint lens+source reconstruction are cross-checked against three fully independent SED-fitting methods, with agreement at ≲1σ; this external validation prevents the central results from reducing to self-referential fitting. No self-definitional equations, fitted inputs relabeled as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the abstract or described workflow. The chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard strong-lensing assumptions and the fitting of multiple mass-model parameters to observational constraints; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • lens mass model parameters
    Multiple parameters (e.g., halo centers, ellipticities, and scale radii) are fitted to the combined position and extended-brightness constraints.
axioms (1)
  • standard math Thin-lens approximation and standard parametric mass profiles for galaxy clusters
    Invoked throughout the strong-lensing modeling section of the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5954 in / 1379 out tokens · 38805 ms · 2026-05-18T04:44:36.314547+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    H., et al

    Acebron, A., Grillo, C., Suyu, S. H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 110

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Agrawal, A., Pierel, J. D. R., Narayan, G., et al. 2025, Testing Lens Models of PLCK G165.7+67.0 Using Lensed SN H0pe Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    H., & Christensen, L

    Bolamperti, A., Grillo, C., Cañameras, R., Suyu, S. H., & Christensen, L. 2023, A&A, 671, A60

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    2024, astropy/photutils: 2.0.2

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2024, astropy/photutils: 2.0.2

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline Cañameras, R., Nesvadba, N

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline Cañameras, R., Nesvadba, N. P. H., Guery, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A105 Cañameras, R., Nesvadba, N. P. H., Limousin, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A60

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

    work page 1989

  7. [7]

    2024, ApJ, 969, 80

    Chakraborty, S., Sadler, B., Hoeflich, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 969, 80

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    L., Frye, B

    Chen, W., Kelly, P. L., Frye, B. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 102

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    2025, Research in Astronomy and Astro- physics, 25, 065013

    Ding, H., Shu, Y ., Chen, Y ., et al. 2025, Research in Astronomy and Astro- physics, 25, 065013

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Where is the matter in the Merging Cluster Abell 2218?

    Dunkley, J., Bucher, M., Ferreira, P. G., Moodley, K., & Skordis, C. 2005, MN- RAS, 356, 925 Elíasdóttir, Á., Limousin, M., Richard, J., et al. 2007, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0710.5636

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  11. [11]

    H., et al

    Ertl, S., Schuldt, S., Suyu, S. H., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A2

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. 1999, PASP, 111, 63

    work page 1999

  13. [13]

    2023, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 96, 1

    Frye, B., Pascale, M., Cohen, S., et al. 2023, Transient Name Server AstroNote, 96, 1

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    L., Pascale, M., Pierel, J., et al

    Frye, B. L., Pascale, M., Pierel, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 961, 171

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    L., Pascale, M., Qin, Y ., et al

    Frye, B. L., Pascale, M., Qin, Y ., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 51

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    B., Knollmüller, J., Roth, J., & Suyu, S

    Galan, A., Caminha, G. B., Knollmüller, J., Roth, J., & Suyu, S. H. 2024, A&A, 689, A304

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Galan, A., Vernardos, G., Peel, A., Courbin, F., & Starck, J. L. 2022, A&A, 668, A155

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    BayeSN-TD: Time Delay and $H_0$ Estimation for Lensed SN H0pe

    Grayling, M., Thorp, S., Mandel, K. S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.11719

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    H., et al

    Grillo, C., Karman, W., Suyu, S. H., et al. 2016, ApJ, 822, 78

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    A., Barkhudaryan, L

    Hakobyan, A. A., Barkhudaryan, L. V ., Karapetyan, A. G., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 1424

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    C., Yun, M

    Harrington, K. C., Yun, M. S., Cybulski, R., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 4383

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90

    work page 2007

  23. [23]

    P., Limousin, M., et al

    Jullo, E., Kneib, J. P., Limousin, M., et al. 2007, New Journal of Physics, 9, 447

    work page 2007

  24. [24]

    S., Frye, B

    Kamieneski, P. S., Frye, B. L., Windhorst, R. A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 25

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    & Kovner, I

    Kassiola, A. & Kovner, I. 1993, ApJ, 417, 450

    work page 1993

  26. [26]

    L., Hicken, M., Burke, D

    Kelly, P. L., Hicken, M., Burke, D. L., Mandel, K. S., & Kirshner, R. P. 2010, ApJ, 715, 743

    work page 2010

  27. [27]

    L., Rodney, S

    Kelly, P. L., Rodney, S. A., Treu, T., et al. 2015, Science, 347, 1123

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    A., Windhorst, R

    Kim, D., Jansen, R. A., Windhorst, R. A., Cohen, S. H., & McCabe, T. J. 2019, ApJ, 884, 21

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    M., Faber, S

    Koekemoer, A. M., Faber, S. M., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2011, ApJS, 197, 36

    work page 2011

  30. [30]

    GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples

    Lewis, A. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1910.13970

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  31. [31]

    2023, MNRAS, 518, 1985

    Meldorf, C., Palmese, A., Brout, D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 1985

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    2023, Journal of Open Source Software, 8, 5340

    Michalewicz, K., Millon, M., Dux, F., & Courbin, F. 2023, Journal of Open Source Software, 8, 5340

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Millon, M., Michalewicz, K., Dux, F., Courbin, F., & Marshall, P. J. 2024, AJ, 168, 55

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Oliphant, T. E. 2006, A guide to NumPy, V ol. 1 (Trelgol Publishing USA)

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    L., Dai, L., et al

    Pascale, M., Frye, B. L., Dai, L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 932, 85

    work page 2022

  36. [36]

    L., Pierel, J

    Pascale, M., Frye, B. L., Pierel, J. D. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 13

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Perera, D., Jr, J. H. M., Williams, L. L. R., et al. 2025, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 8, 37

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    Pierel, J. D. R., Frye, B. L., Pascale, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 967, 50 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Altieri, B., et al. 2015, A&A, 582, A30

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    2024, MNRAS, 534, 2263

    Popovic, B., Wiseman, P., Sullivan, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 2263

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    M., Sip˝ocz, B

    Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ocz, B. M., Günther, H. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    2018, A&A, 615, A68

    Roman, M., Hardin, D., Betoule, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A68

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Ruiter, A. J. & Seitenzahl, I. R. 2025, A&A Rev., 33, 1

    work page 2025

  43. [43]

    2024, ApJ, 973, 3

    Sheu, W., Cikota, A., Huang, X., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 3

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    H., Auger, M

    Suyu, S. H., Auger, M. W., Hilbert, S., et al. 2013, ApJ, 766, 70

    work page 2013

  45. [45]

    Suyu, S. H. & Halkola, A. 2010, A&A, 524, A94

    work page 2010

  46. [46]

    H., Hensel, S

    Suyu, S. H., Hensel, S. W., McKean, J. P., et al. 2012, ApJ, 750, 10

    work page 2012

  47. [47]

    H., Marshall, P

    Suyu, S. H., Marshall, P. J., Blandford, R. D., et al. 2009, ApJ, 691, 277

    work page 2009

  48. [48]

    H., Marshall, P

    Suyu, S. H., Marshall, P. J., Hobson, M. P., & Blandford, R. D. 2006, MNRAS, 371, 983

    work page 2006

  49. [49]

    A., Burns, C

    Uddin, S. A., Burns, C. R., Phillips, M. M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 143 Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, G. 2011, Computing in Science & Engineering, 13, 22

    work page 2020

  50. [50]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    B., et al

    Wang, H., Cañameras, R., Caminha, G. B., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, A162

    work page 2022

  52. [52]

    A., Cohen, S

    Windhorst, R. A., Cohen, S. H., Jansen, R. A., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 13

    work page 2023

  53. [53]

    C., Suyu, S

    Wong, K. C., Suyu, S. H., Auger, M. W., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 4895 Article number, page 10 of 13 A. Galan et al.: Lens model of PLCK G165 and dust extinction from extended image modeling of SN H0pe host Appendix A: Full joint posterior distribution We show in Fig. A.1 all mass model parameters sampled for our lens models. All parameters are significant...

    work page 2017