4.7 Article

SUBARU WEAK LENSING MEASUREMENTS OF FOUR STRONG LENSING CLUSTERS: ARE LENSING CLUSTERS OVERCONCENTRATED?

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 699, Issue 2, Pages 1038-1052

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/1038

Keywords

dark matter; galaxies: clusters: individual (Abell 1703, SDSS J1446+3032, SDSS J1531+3414, SDSS J2111-0115); gravitational lensing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We derive radial mass profiles of four strong lensing selected clusters which show prominent giant arcs (Abell 1703, SDSS J1446+3032, SDSS J1531+3414, and SDSS J2111-0115), by combining detailed strong lens modeling with weak lensing shear measured from deep Subaru Suprime-cam images. Weak lensing signals are detected at high significance for all four clusters, whose redshifts range from z = 0.28 to 0.64. We demonstrate that adding strong lensing information with known arc redshifts significantly improves constraints on the mass density profile, compared with those obtained from weak lensing alone. While the mass profiles are well fitted by the universal form predicted in N-body simulations of the Lambda-dominated cold dark matter model, all four clusters appear to be slightly more centrally concentrated (the concentration parameters c(vir) similar to 8) than theoretical predictions, even after accounting for the bias toward higher concentrations inherent in lensing-selected samples. Our results are consistent with previous studies which similarly detected a concentration excess, and increase the total number of clusters studied with the combined strong and weak lensing technique to 10. Combining our sample with previous work, we find that clusters with larger Einstein radii are more anomalously concentrated. We also present a detailed model of the lensing cluster Abell 1703 with constraints from multiple image families, and find the dark matter inner density profile to be cuspy with the slope consistent with -1, in agreement with expectations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available