arxiv: 2604.05237 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-06 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

JWST Lensed Quasar Dark Matter Survey V: Measuring the minimum halo mass with strong gravitational lensing

A. M. Nierenberg , D. Gilman , T. Treu , X. Du , C. Gannon , H. Paugnat , S. Birrer , A. J. Benson

show 14 more authors

K. N. Abazajian T. Anguita S.G. Djorgovski S. F. Hoenig R. E. Keeley A. Kusenko H. R. Larsson L. A. Moustakas P. Mozumdar W. Sheu D. Sluse D. Stern D. Williams K. C. Wong

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO

keywords strong gravitational lensingdark matter haloshalo mass functionsubhalosquasar lensescold dark mattercosmology

0 comments

The pith

Strong lensing of 28 quasars limits the minimum dark matter halo mass to below 10^8.3 solar masses at 10:1 odds.

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

The paper investigates the smallest possible masses for dark matter halos using strong gravitational lensing observations of 28 quasars. It tests an extreme cold dark matter scenario that includes a sharp low-mass cutoff and accounts for tidal stripping of subhalos. Lensing detects halos regardless of whether they contain stars or gas, providing a probe at cosmological distances. The analysis yields upper limits on the cutoff mass that are comparable to or tighter than those from Milky Way satellite galaxies. The work also projects that 200 such lenses would improve the constraints by more than an order of magnitude and allow direct measurement of subhalo abundance.

Core claim

What carries the argument

The sharp cutoff scale m_low in the CDM halo mass function, modeled within strong lensing signals that include tidal stripping of subhalos and line-of-sight halos.

If this is right

The derived limits are comparable to or stronger than existing constraints from Milky Way satellite galaxies.
A sample of 200 quadruply imaged quasar lenses would improve the constraints by more than an order of magnitude.
With a larger sample the normalization of the subhalo mass function can be directly constrained from the data, removing a major source of uncertainty.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

This lensing technique can probe dark matter structure at high redshifts where local galaxy counts cannot reach.
Upcoming wide-field surveys will discover thousands of lensed quasars, turning this method into a standard tool for mapping the low-mass end of the halo mass function.
The same data set could be reanalyzed under alternative dark matter models to test predictions for the minimum halo mass.

Load-bearing premise

The limits assume an extreme sharp cutoff in the halo mass function and rely on specific priors for the subhalo mass function normalization taken from galacticus or N-body simulations.

What would settle it

Detection of substantially more low-mass halos than the model allows in a sample of 200 quadruply imaged quasar lenses would violate the reported upper limit on m_low at the stated odds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05237 by A. J. Benson, A. Kusenko, A. M. Nierenberg, C. Gannon, D. Gilman, D. Sluse, D. Stern, D. Williams, H. Paugnat, H. R. Larsson, K. C. Wong, K. N. Abazajian, L. A. Moustakas, P. Mozumdar, R. E. Keeley, S. Birrer, S. F. Hoenig, S.G. Djorgovski, T. Anguita, T. Treu, W. Sheu, X. Du.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Comparison of the flux ratio distribution for a mock cusp lens [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Forecast 10:1 posterior odds ratio limit on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We explore the lowest mass limit that can be placed on the halo mass function in CDM using 28 strong gravitational lenses. For this purpose, we study an extreme model in which the halo mass function and mass-concentration relation follow CDM, with a sharp cutoff at some mass scale, $m_{\rm{low}}$. Lensing provides a unique window into this quantity as it does not depend on the presence of baryons in dark matter halos and also allows the detection of low mass halos at cosmological distances, both in the lens galaxies and along the line-of-sight. Our model incorporates the effects of tidal stripping of subhalos, leading to the presence of many subhalos below a given model cutoff scale. We place an upper limit on the low-mass cutoff of the halo mass function of $m_{\rm{low}}<10^{8.3}$ M$_\odot$ at 10:1 odds using a prior for the normalization of the subhalo mass function from the semi-analytic model {\tt galacticus} and $m_{\rm{low}}<10^{8.2}$ M$_\odot$ at 10:1 odds using a prior from $N$-body simulations. These limits are comparable to, or stronger than, existing constraints based on Milky Way satellite galaxies. Based on these results, we forecast more than an order of magnitude improvement with a sample of 200 quadruply imaged quasar lenses. This number represents a small subset of the thousands that are anticipated to be discovered by Rubin, Euclid, and Roman. Furthermore, with this larger sample of lenses we expect to directly constrain the normalization of the subhalo mass function, thereby eliminating a major source of uncertainty in our current measurements.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

New upper limits on m_low from 28 lenses but still conditional on external priors for subhalo normalization.

read the letter

The paper reports m_low < 10^8.3 solar masses at 10:1 odds using a galacticus prior and < 10^8.2 using an N-body prior. Those are the concrete numbers they get from the 28-lens sample under a sharp-cutoff CDM model that includes tidal stripping of subhalos. The lensing data itself is independent of baryons, which is the main practical advantage over Milky Way satellite counts, and the forecast for 200 lenses is straightforward and useful since that size should let them fit the normalization directly. The modeling choice to keep subhalos below the cutoff via stripping is a sensible extension of earlier lensing work. The limits are new for this sample and setup. The analysis appears careful in how it propagates the priors and reports the odds ratio. The central limitation is exactly the one the stress test flags: the subhalo mass function normalization is fixed to the chosen external prior rather than inferred from the lenses. The paper itself states that 28 lenses are not enough to constrain that normalization, so any mismatch between the prior and reality rescales the allowed m_low. The sharp cutoff is also an extreme case; real suppression might be smoother. Without the full posterior plots and data tables it is hard to judge how much the lensing likelihood actually pulls against the prior, but the abstract is transparent about the dependence. This is for people who work on small-scale dark matter or upcoming lensing surveys. It shows clear thinking about the method and its current limits. The work is worth a serious referee because the technique scales with the large samples coming from Rubin, Euclid, and Roman, and the authors have stated the main uncertainty plainly.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes 28 strong gravitational lenses observed by JWST to constrain the low-mass cutoff m_low of the CDM halo mass function. It adopts an extreme model with a sharp cutoff in both the halo mass function and mass-concentration relation, incorporates tidal stripping of subhalos, and fixes the subhalo mass function normalization to priors drawn from the galacticus semi-analytic model or from N-body simulations. This yields upper limits m_low < 10^{8.3} M_⊙ (galacticus prior) and m_low < 10^{8.2} M_⊙ (N-body prior) at 10:1 odds. The work also forecasts that a sample of ~200 quadruply imaged quasars would improve the limits by more than an order of magnitude and allow the normalization itself to be constrained from the data.

Significance. If the modeling and statistical analysis are sound, the result supplies an independent, baryon-insensitive constraint on the minimum halo mass that is competitive with existing Milky Way satellite limits. The explicit inclusion of tidal stripping (which populates subhalos below the nominal cutoff) and the forecast for future large samples from Rubin, Euclid, and Roman are strengths that highlight the method's scalability. The work therefore adds a valuable lensing-based avenue to the broader effort of testing CDM on small scales.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (results): The headline upper limits on m_low are derived with the subhalo mass function normalization held fixed at the value supplied by the chosen external prior. The manuscript itself states that ~200 lenses are required to constrain this normalization from the data. Consequently the present 28-lens bounds remain prior-dominated; a quantitative sensitivity study that varies the normalization within the plausible range allowed by galacticus or the N-body simulations (and shows the resulting shift in the m_low posterior) is needed to establish the robustness of the quoted limits.
[§3] §3 (modeling): The analysis assumes a perfectly sharp cutoff in the halo mass function. While the paper correctly labels this an “extreme model,” the central claim would be strengthened by a brief demonstration of how the inferred m_low limit changes under a smoother suppression (e.g., an exponential roll-off or a power-law taper) that is still consistent with the same tidal-stripping treatment.

minor comments (2)

Notation for m_low and the mass units (M_⊙) should be used consistently in all equations, tables, and figure labels.
Figure captions that display posterior contours or likelihood surfaces should explicitly state which prior (galacticus or N-body) is adopted in each panel.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and agree that the suggested additions will strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (results): The headline upper limits on m_low are derived with the subhalo mass function normalization held fixed at the value supplied by the chosen external prior. The manuscript itself states that ~200 lenses are required to constrain this normalization from the data. Consequently the present 28-lens bounds remain prior-dominated; a quantitative sensitivity study that varies the normalization within the plausible range allowed by galacticus or the N-body simulations (and shows the resulting shift in the m_low posterior) is needed to establish the robustness of the quoted limits.

Authors: We agree that the quoted m_low limits are influenced by the fixed normalization of the subhalo mass function, as we already note in the manuscript when discussing the need for ~200 lenses to constrain it from the data. To quantify this dependence, we will add a sensitivity analysis to §4 in which the normalization is varied over the plausible range consistent with both the galacticus model and N-body simulations. The resulting changes to the m_low posterior will be shown explicitly, and the abstract will be updated to reflect this additional robustness check. revision: yes
Referee: [§3] §3 (modeling): The analysis assumes a perfectly sharp cutoff in the halo mass function. While the paper correctly labels this an “extreme model,” the central claim would be strengthened by a brief demonstration of how the inferred m_low limit changes under a smoother suppression (e.g., an exponential roll-off or a power-law taper) that is still consistent with the same tidal-stripping treatment.

Authors: We acknowledge that the sharp cutoff is an extreme assumption, as labeled in the manuscript. We will add a short demonstration in §3 (or a new subsection) that recomputes the m_low limits under a smoother suppression, such as an exponential roll-off or power-law taper, while retaining the identical tidal-stripping model for subhalos. This will illustrate the sensitivity of the results to the precise form of the cutoff and support the robustness of the extreme-model limits. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: m_low limits derived from lensing data conditional on external priors

full rationale

The core result is an upper limit on m_low obtained via Bayesian inference on 28 strong lenses, with the subhalo mass function normalization held fixed to priors taken from galacticus and N-body simulations. These priors are external to the present analysis (even though one author is associated with galacticus) and are explicitly treated as inputs rather than outputs. The paper states that a much larger sample would be needed to constrain the normalization itself, confirming that the current posterior remains prior-dependent but does not reduce the reported m_low bound to a tautology or self-citation. No step equates a fitted quantity to a prediction by construction, invokes a self-citation as a uniqueness theorem, or renames a known result. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against the lensing observables once the stated priors are granted.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the validity of the CDM framework with cutoff, the modeling of lensing perturbations, and the accuracy of the external priors for subhalo abundance.

free parameters (1)

subhalo mass function normalization
The normalization is taken from priors in galacticus or N-body, not fitted freely in this analysis.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The halo mass function follows CDM with a sharp cutoff at m_low
This is the extreme model explored in the study.
domain assumption Tidal stripping affects subhalos below the cutoff scale
Incorporated to explain presence of subhalos below m_low.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5742 in / 1541 out tokens · 50493 ms · 2026-05-10T18:38:54.156366+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlexanderDuality.lean alexander_duality_circle_linking unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We explore the lowest mass limit that can be placed on the halo mass function in CDM using 28 strong gravitational lenses... sharp cutoff at some mass scale, m_low.
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Our model incorporates the effects of tidal stripping of subhalos... priors for the normalization of the subhalo mass function from galacticus and N-body simulations.

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

55 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

[1]

CAREER: An order of magnitudeimprovementinmeasurementsofthephysicalprop- erties of dark matter

are based exclusively on subhalos and are relative to the peak mass that subhalo ever reached. Given that subhalos lose mass over an extended period of time prior to infall, the connectionbetweenmassdefinitionsbetweenthemassatinfall andthepeakinfallmasscandifferbyupto40%[38]. Tosome extent this uncertainty is captured by our two priors on the normalizatio...

2023
[2]

Diemand, B

J. Diemand, B. Moore, and J. Stadel, Earth-mass dark-matter haloes as the first structures in the early Universe, Nature433, 389 (2005)

2005
[3]

B.Moore,S.Ghigna,F.Governato,G.Lake,T.Quinn,J.Stadel, andP.Tozzi,Darkmattersubstructurewithingalactichalos,The Astrophysical Journal524, L19 (1999)

1999
[4]

Kauffmann, S

G. Kauffmann, S. D. M. White, and B. Guiderdoni, The for- mation and evolution of galaxies within merging dark matter haloes., MNRAS264, 201 (1993)

1993
[5]

Klypin, A

A. Klypin, A. V. Kravtsov, O. Valenzuela, and F. Prada, Where Are the Missing Galactic Satellites?, Astrophys. J.522, 82 (1999)

1999
[6]

Doliva-Dolinsky, M

A. Doliva-Dolinsky, M. L. M. Collins, and N. F. Martin, The satellite galaxies of the Milky Way and Andromeda, arXiv e- prints , arXiv:2502.06948 (2025), arXiv:2502.06948. 1 http://www.astropy.org 2 https://github.com/lenstronomy/lenstronomy 3 https://github.com/dangilman/pyHalo 4 https://github.com/dangilman/trikde 5 https://github.com/dangilman/samana

work page arXiv 2025
[7]

Battaglia and C

G. Battaglia and C. Nipoti, Stellar dynamics and dark matter in Local Group dwarf galaxies, Nature Astronomy6, 659 (2022), arXiv:2205.07821 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2022
[8]

E.J.Tollerud,J.S.Bullock,L.E.Strigari,andB.Willman,Hun- dreds of milky way satellites? Luminosity bias in the satellite luminosity function, ApJ688, 277 (2008)

2008
[9]

S. Y. Kim, A. H. G. Peter, and J. R. Hargis, Missing Satel- lites Problem: Completeness Corrections to the Number of Satellite Galaxies in the Milky Way are Consistent with Cold Dark Matter Predictions, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 211302 (2018), arXiv:1711.06267 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2018
[10]

E. O. Nadler, R. H. Wechsler, K. Bechtol, Y. Y. Mao, G. Green, A. Drlica-Wagner, M. McNanna, S. Mau, A. B. Pace, J. D. Simon, A. Kravtsov, S. Dodelson, T. S. Li, A. H. Riley, M. Y. Wang,T.M.C.Abbott,M.Aguena,S.Allam,J.Annis,S.Avila, G.M.Bernstein,E.Bertin,D.Brooks,D.L.Burke,A.C.Rosell, M.C.Kind,J.Carretero,M.Costanzi,L.N.daCosta,J.DeVi- cente, S. Desai, A...

2020
[11]

Dalal and C

N. Dalal and C. S. Kochanek, Direct Detection of Cold Dark Matter Substructure, ApJ572, 25 (2002)

2002
[12]

S.MaoandP.Schneider,Evidenceforsubstructureinlensgalax- ies?, MNRAS295, 587 (1998)

1998
[13]

Vegetti, S

S. Vegetti, S. Birrer, G. Despali, C. D. Fassnacht, D. Gilman, Y.Hezaveh,L.PerreaultLevasseur,J.P.McKean,D.M.Powell, C.M.O’Riordan,andG.Vernardos,Stronggravitationallensing as a probe of dark matter, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2306.11781 (2023)

work page arXiv 2023
[14]

Gilman, A

D. Gilman, A. M. Nierenberg, T. Treu, C. Gannon, X. Du, H. Paugnat, S. Birrer, A. J. Benson, P. Mozumdar, K. C. Wong, D. Williams, R. E. Keeley, K. N. Abazajian, T. Anguita, V. N. Bennert, S. G. Djorgovski, A. Kusenko, M. Malkan, T. Mor- ishita,V.Motta,L.A.Moustakas,W.Sheu,D.Sluse,andM.Sti- avelli,Jwstlensedquasardarkmattersurveyiv: Stringentwarm darkmatt...

work page arXiv 2025
[15]

A. M. Nierenberg, T. Treu, S. A. Wright, C. D. Fassnacht, and M. W. Auger, Detection of substructure with adaptive optics integralfieldspectroscopyofthegravitationallensB1422+231, MNRAS442, 2434 (2014)

2014
[16]

A. M. Nierenberg, T. Treu, G. Brammer, A. H. G. Peter, C. D. Fassnacht, C. R. Keeton, C. S. Kochanek, K. B. Schmidt, D. Sluse, and S. A. Wright, Probing dark matter substructure in the gravitational lens HE 0435-1223 with the WFC3 grism, MNRAS471, 2224 (2017)

2017
[17]

A. M. Nierenberg, D. Gilman, T. Treu, G. Brammer, S. Birrer, L.Moustakas,A.Agnello,T.Anguita,C.D.Fassnacht,V.Motta, A. H. G. Peter, and D. Sluse, Double dark matter vision: Twice the number of compact-source lenses with narrow-line lensing and the WFC3 grism, MNRAS492, 5314 (2020)

2020
[18]

A.M.Nierenberg, R.E.Keeley, D.Sluse, D.Gilman, S.Birrer, T. Treu, K. N. Abazajian, T. Anguita, A. J. Benson, V. N. Ben- nert, S. G. Djorgovski, X. Du, C. D. Fassnacht, S. F. Hoenig, A. Kusenko, C. Lemon, M. Malkan, V. Motta, L. A. Mous- takas, D. Stern, and R. H. Wechsler, JWST lensed quasar dark matter survey I: Description and First Results, arXiv e-pri...

work page arXiv 2023
[19]

R. E. Keeley, A. M. Nierenberg, D. Gilman, C. Gannon, S. Bir- rer, T. Treu, A. J. Benson, X. Du, K. N. Abazajian, T. Anguita, V. N. Bennert, S. G. Djorgovski, K. K. Gupta, S. F. Hoenig, A.Kusenko,C.Lemon,M.Malkan,V.Motta,L.A.Moustakas, M. S. H. Oh, D. Sluse, D. Stern, and R. H. Wechsler, JWST lensed quasar dark matter survey - II. Strongest gravitational ...

2024
[20]

R. E. Keeley, A. M. Nierenberg, D. Gilman, T. Treu, X. Du, C. Gannon, P. Mozumdar, K. C. Wong, H. Paugnat, S. Birrer, M. Malkan, A. J. Benson, K. N. Abazajian, T. Anguita, V. N. Bennert, S. G. Djorgovski, S. F. Hoenig, A. Kusenko, H. R. Larsson, T. Morishita, V. Motta, L. A. Moustakas, W. Sheu, D.Sluse,D.Stern,M.Stiavelli,andD.Williams,JWSTLensed Quasar D...

work page arXiv 2025
[21]

Gilman, S

D. Gilman, S. Birrer, A. Nierenberg, and M. S. H. Oh, Tur- bocharging constraints on dark matter substructure through a synthesisof stronglensing fluxratios andextendedlensed arcs, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2403.03253 (2024), arXiv:2403.03253 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2024
[22]

M. W. Auger, T. Treu, A. S. Bolton, R. Gavazzi, L. V. E. Koop- mans,P.J.Marshall,L.A.Moustakas,andS.Burles,TheSloan LensACSSurvey.X.Stellar,Dynamical,andTotalMassCorre- lations of Massive Early-type Galaxies, Astrophys. J.724, 511 (2010)

2010
[23]

C.N.Hao,S.Mao,Z.G.Deng,X.Y.Xia,andH.Wu,Isophotal Shapes of Elliptical/S0 Galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, MNRAS370, 1339 (2006)

2006
[24]

M. S. H. Oh, A. Nierenberg, D. Gilman, and S. Birrer, Im- provingfluxratioanomalyprecisionbymeasuringgravitational lens multipole moments with extended arcs, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2404.17124 (2024), arXiv:2404.17124 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2024
[25]

R. K. Sheth, H. J. Mo, and G. Tormen, Ellipsoidal collapse and an improved model for the number and spatial distribution of dark matter haloes, MNRAS323, 1 (2001)

2001
[26]

Lazar, J

A. Lazar, J. S. Bullock, M. Boylan-Kolchin, R. Feldmann, O. Çatmabacak, and L. Moustakas, Out of sight, out of mind? Theimpactofcorrelatedclusteringinsubstructurelensing,MN- RAS502, 6064 (2021)

2021
[27]

C.Giocoli,G.Tormen,andF.C.vandenBosch,Thepopulation ofdarkmattersubhaloes: massfunctionsandaveragemass-loss rates, MNRAS386, 2135 (2008), arXiv:0712.1563 [astro-ph]

work page arXiv 2008
[28]

Springel, J

V. Springel, J. Wang, M. Vogelsberger, A. Ludlow, A. Jenkins, A. Helmi, J. F. Navarro, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. M. White, The Aquarius Project: the subhaloes of galactic haloes, MNRAS 391, 1685 (2008), arXiv:0809.0898 [astro-ph]

work page arXiv 2008
[29]

D.Fiacconi,P.Madau,D.Potter,andJ.Stadel,ColdDarkMatter SubstructuresinEarly-typeGalaxyHalos,ApJ824,144(2016)

2016
[30]

A. J. Benson, The normalization and slope of the dark matter (sub-)halo mass function on sub-galactic scales, MNRAS493, 1268 (2020), arXiv:1911.04579 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2020
[31]

Gannon, A

C. Gannon, A. Nierenberg, A. Benson, R. Keeley, X. Du, and D. Gilman, Dark matter substructure: A lensing perspective, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2501.17362 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[32]

D. J. Lagattuta, C. D. Fassnacht, M. W. Auger, P. J. Marshall, M. Bradač, T. Treu, R. Gavazzi, T. Schrabback, C. Faure, and T. Anguita, Cosmic evolution of virial and stellar mass in mas- sive early-type galaxies*, ApJ716, 1579 (2010)

2010
[33]

X.Du,D.Gilman,T.Treu,A.Benson,andC.Gannon,Empirical modelforthetidalevolutionofdarkmattersubstructurearound strong gravitational lenses, Phys. Rev. D112, 023009 (2025)

2025
[34]

A.J.Benson,GALACTICUS:Asemi-analyticmodelofgalaxy formation, New Astronomy17, 175 (2012), arXiv:1008.1786 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2012
[35]

S. Yang, X. Du, A. J. Benson, A. R. Pullen, and A. H. G. Peter, Anewcalibrationmethodofsub-haloorbitalevolutionforsemi- analytic models, MNRAS498, 3902 (2020), arXiv:2003.10646 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2020
[36]

X. Du, A. Benson, Z. Carton Zeng, T. Treu, A. H. G. Peter, C. Mace, F. Jiang, S. Yang, C. Gannon, D. Gilman, Anna. M. Nierenberg,andE.O.Nadler,Tidalevolutionofcoredandcuspy dark matter halos, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2403.09597 (2024), 2403.09597 [astro-ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2024
[37]

Birrer and A

S. Birrer and A. Amara, Lenstronomy: Multi-purpose gravi- tational lens modelling software package, Physics of the Dark Universe22, 189 (2018)

2018
[38]

Morgan, G

S.Birrer,A.Shajib,D.Gilman,A.Galan,J.Aalbers,M.Millon, R. Morgan, G. Pagano, J. Park, L. Teodori, N. Tessore, M. Ue- land,L.VandeVyvere,S.Wagner-Carena,E.Wempe,L.Yang, 8 X. Ding, T. Schmidt, D. Sluse, M. Zhang, and A. Amara, Lenstronomy II: A gravitational lensing software ecosystem, The Journal of Open Source Software6, 3283 (2021)

2021
[39]

Ahvazi, A

N. Ahvazi, A. Benson, L. V. Sales, E. O. Nadler, S. Weera- sooriya, X. Du, and M. S. Bovill, A comprehensive model for the formation and evolution of the faintest Milky Way dwarf satellites,MNRAS529,3387(2024),arXiv:2308.13599[astro- ph.GA]

work page arXiv 2024
[40]

Gilman, Y.-M

D. Gilman, Y.-M. Zhong, and J. Bovy, Constraining resonant dark matter self-interactions with strong gravitational lenses, Phys. Rev. D107, 103008 (2023)

2023
[41]

Q.Minor,S.Gad-Nasr,M.Kaplinghat,andS.Vegetti,Anunex- pected high concentration for the dark substructure in the grav- itational lens SDSSJ0946+1006, MNRAS507, 1662 (2021)

2021
[42]

Despali, F

G. Despali, F. M. Heinze, C. D. Fassnacht, S. Vegetti, C. Sp- ingola, R. Klessen, and M. Tajalli, Detecting low-mass haloes with strong gravitational lensing: II. Constraints on the density profiles of two detected subhaloes, A&A699, A222 (2025), arXiv:2407.12910 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[43]

Gravitationally lensed quasars and supernovae in future wide-field optical imaging surveys

M. Oguri and P. J. Marshall, MNRAS405, 2579 (2010), 1001.2037 [astro-ph.CO]

work page Pith review arXiv 2010
[44]

E. O. Nadler, S. Birrer, D. Gilman, R. H. Wechsler, X. Du, A. Benson, A. M. Nierenberg, and T. Treu, Dark Matter Con- straints from a Unified Analysis of Strong Gravitational Lenses and Milky Way Satellite Galaxies, ApJ917, 7 (2021)

2021
[45]

Pordes, OSG Consortium, D

R. Pordes, OSG Consortium, D. Petravick, B. Kramer, D. Ol- son, M. Livny, A. Roy, P. Avery, K. Blackburn, T. Wenaus, F. Würthwein, I. Foster, R. Gardner, M. Wilde, A. Blatecky, J. McGee, and R. Quick, The open science grid, inJournal of Physics Conference Series, Journal of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 78 (IOP, 2007) p. 012057

2007
[46]

Sfiligoi, D

I. Sfiligoi, D. C. Bradley, B. Holzman, P. Mhashilkar, S. Padhi, and F. Wurthwein, The Pilot Way to Grid Resources Using glideinWMS, in2009 WRI World Congress on Computer Sci- ence and Information Engineering, Vol. 2 (2009) p. 92

2009
[47]

Droettboom, E

AstropyCollaboration,T.P.Robitaille,E.J.Tollerud,P.Green- field, M. Droettboom, E. Bray, T. Aldcroft, M. Davis, A. Gins- burg, A. M. Price-Whelan, W. E. Kerzendorf, A. Conley, N. Crighton, K. Barbary, D. Muna, H. Ferguson, F. Grollier, M. M. Parikh, P. H. Nair, H. M. Unther, C. Deil, J. Woillez, S. Conseil, R. Kramer, J. E. H. Turner, L. Singer, R. Fox, B...

2013
[48]

Astropy Collaboration, A. M. Price-Whelan, B. M. Sipőcz, H. M. Günther, P. L. Lim, S. M. Crawford, S. Conseil, D. L. Shupe, M. W. Craig, N. Dencheva, A. Ginsburg, J. T. Vand erPlas, L. D. Bradley, D. Pérez-Suárez, M. de Val-Borro, T. L. Aldcroft,K.L.Cruz,T.P.Robitaille,E.J.Tollerud,C.Ardelean, T.Babej,Y.P.Bach,M.Bachetti,A.V.Bakanov,S.P.Bamford, G.Barents...

2018
[49]

othe, A. Donath, E. Tollerud, B. M. Morris, A. Ginsburg, E. Vaher, B. A. Weaver, J. Tocknell, W. Jamieson, M. H. van Kerkwijk, T. P. Robitaille, B. Merry, M. Bachetti, H. M. G

Astropy Collaboration, A.M. Price-Whelan, P.L. Lim, N.Earl, N. Starkman, L. Bradley, D. L. Shupe, A. A. Patil, L. Cor- rales, C. E. Brasseur, M. N"othe, A. Donath, E. Tollerud, B. M. Morris, A. Ginsburg, E. Vaher, B. A. Weaver, J. Tocknell, W. Jamieson, M. H. van Kerkwijk, T. P. Robitaille, B. Merry, M. Bachetti, H. M. G"unther, T. L. Aldcroft, J. A. Alva...

2022
[50]

T. M. Ragonneau,Model-Based Derivative-Free Optimization Methods and Software, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Applied Mathematics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (2022)

2022
[51]

T.M.RagonneauandZ.Zhang,COBYQAVersion1.1.2(2024)

2024
[52]

B.Diemer,COLOSSUS:Apythontoolkitforcosmology,large- scale structure, and dark matter halos, ApJs239, 35 (2018)

2018
[53]

C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt, R. Gommers, P. Virtanen, D. Cournapeau, E. Wieser, J. Taylor, S. Berg, N. J. Smith, R. Kern, M. Picus, S. Hoyer, M. H. van Kerkwijk, M. Brett, A. Haldane, J. F. del Río, M. Wiebe, P. Peterson, P. Gérard-Marchant, K. Sheppard, T. Reddy, W. Weckesser, H. Abbasi, C. Gohlke, and T. E. Oliphant, Array programmin...

2020
[54]

D.Gilman,S.Birrer,A.Nierenberg,T.Treu,X.Du,andA.Ben- son, Warm dark matter chills out: Constraints on the halo mass functionandthefree-streaminglengthofdarkmatterwitheight quadruple-imagestronggravitationallenses,MNRAS491,6077 (2020)

2020
[55]

Virtanen, R

P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W.Weckesser,J.Bright,S.J.vanderWalt, M.Brett,J.Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E.Larson,C.J.Carey,İ.Polat,Y.Feng,E.W.Moore,J.Vander- Plas, D. Laxalde, J. Perktold, R. Cimrman, I. Henriksen, E. A. Quintero, C. R...

2020