Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Strong Lens Time Delay Challenge: II. Results of TDC1

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

arxiv 1409.1254 v2 pith:LPUGQVME submitted 2014-09-03 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.CO

Strong Lens Time Delay Challenge: II. Results of TDC1

classification astro-ph.IM astro-ph.CO
keywords challengelightmethodsresultstdc1curvesdelaylens
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We present the results of the first strong lens time delay challenge. The motivation, experimental design, and entry level challenge are described in a companion paper. This paper presents the main challenge, TDC1, which consisted of analyzing thousands of simulated light curves blindly. The observational properties of the light curves cover the range in quality obtained for current targeted efforts (e.g.,~COSMOGRAIL) and expected from future synoptic surveys (e.g.,~LSST), and include simulated systematic errors. \nteamsA\ teams participated in TDC1, submitting results from \nmethods\ different method variants. After a describing each method, we compute and analyze basic statistics measuring accuracy (or bias) $A$, goodness of fit $\chi^2$, precision $P$, and success rate $f$. For some methods we identify outliers as an important issue. Other methods show that outliers can be controlled via visual inspection or conservative quality control. Several methods are competitive, i.e., give $|A|<0.03$, $P<0.03$, and $\chi^2<1.5$, with some of the methods already reaching sub-percent accuracy. The fraction of light curves yielding a time delay measurement is typically in the range $f = $20--40\%. It depends strongly on the quality of the data: COSMOGRAIL-quality cadence and light curve lengths yield significantly higher $f$ than does sparser sampling. Taking the results of TDC1 at face value, we estimate that LSST should provide around 400 robust time-delay measurements, each with $P<0.03$ and $|A|<0.01$, comparable to current lens modeling uncertainties. In terms of observing strategies, we find that $A$ and $f$ depend mostly on season length, while P depends mostly on cadence and campaign duration.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Microlensing of Microlensing: Effects of Random Stars on the Double-Source-Plane Gravitational Lens

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    First numerical ray-shooting simulation of compound (two-plane) quasar microlensing in the double-source-plane lens J1721+8842 shows new caustic morphologies — convexity violations and lip caustics — that do not occur...