Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Galaxy-Galaxy Flexion: Weak Lensing to Second Order

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 astro-ph/0406376 v2 pith:MY6OXQZA submitted 2004-06-16 astro-ph

classification astro-ph
keywords flexionlensingsignaldevelopdistributionfieldgalaxygalaxy-galaxy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper, we develop a new gravitational lensing inversion technique. While traditional approaches assume that the lensing field varies little across a galaxy image, we note that this variation in the field can give rise to a ``Flexion'' or bending of a galaxy image, which may then be used to detect a lensing signal with increased signal to noise. Since the significance of the Flexion signal increases on small scales, this is ideally suited to galaxy-galaxy lensing. We develop an inversion technique based on the ``Shapelets'' formalism of Refregier (2003). We then demonstrate the proof of this concept by measuring a Flexion signal in the Deep Lens Survey. Assuming an intrinsically isothermal distribution, we find from the Flexion signal alone a velocity width of v_c=221\pm 12 km/s for lens galaxies of r < 21.5, subject to uncertainties in the intrinsic Flexion distribution.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Line-of-sight shear in SLACS strong lenses I: shear and mass model parametrisations

    astro-ph.CO 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

Pith tools