Researcher profile

A. Galan

A. Galan contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

COSMOGRAIL XIX: Time delays in 18 strongly lensed quasars from 15 years of optical monitoring

We present the results of 15 years of monitoring lensed quasars, which was conducted by the COSMOGRAIL programme at the Leonhard Euler 1.2m Swiss Telescope. The decade-long light curves of 23 lensed systems are presented for the first time. We complement our data set with other monitoring data available in the literature to measure the time delays in 18 systems, among which nine reach a relative precision better than 15% for at least one time delay. To achieve this, we developed an automated version of the curve-shifting toolbox PyCS to ensure robust estimation of the time delay in the presence of microlensing, while accounting for the errors due to the imperfect representation of microlensing. We also re-analysed the previously published time delays of RX J1131$-$1231 and HE 0435$-$1223, by adding six and two new seasons of monitoring, respectively, and confirming the previous time-delay measurements. When the time delay measurement is possible, we corrected the light curves of the lensed images from their time delay and present the difference curves to highlight the microlensing signal contained in the data. To date, this is the largest sample of decade-long lens monitoring data, which is useful to measure $H_0$ and the size of quasar accretion discs with microlensing as well as to study quasar variability.

preprint2020arXiv

STRIDES: a 3.9 per cent measurement of the Hubble constant from the strong lens system DES J0408-5354

We present a blind time-delay cosmographic analysis for the lens system DES J0408$-$5354. This system is extraordinary for the presence of two sets of multiple images at different redshifts, which provide the opportunity to obtain more information at the cost of increased modelling complexity with respect to previously analyzed systems. We perform detailed modelling of the mass distribution for this lens system using three band Hubble Space Telescope imaging. We combine the measured time delays, line-of-sight central velocity dispersion of the deflector, and statistically constrained external convergence with our lens models to estimate two cosmological distances. We measure the "effective" time-delay distance corresponding to the redshifts of the deflector and the lensed quasar $D_{Δt}^{\rm eff}=3382^{+146}_{-115}$ Mpc and the angular diameter distance to the deflector $D_{\rm d}=1711^{+376}_{-280}$ Mpc, with covariance between the two distances. From these constraints on the cosmological distances, we infer the Hubble constant $H_0 = 74.2^{+2.7}_{-3.0}$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ assuming a flat $Λ$CDM cosmology and a uniform prior for $Ω_{\rm m}$ as $Ω_{\rm m} \sim \mathcal{U}(0.05, 0.5)$. This measurement gives the most precise constraint on $H_0$ to date from a single lens. Our measurement is consistent with that obtained from the previous sample of six lenses analyzed by the $H_0$ Lenses in COSMOGRAIL's Wellspring (H0LiCOW) collaboration. It is also consistent with measurements of $H_0$ based on the local distance ladder, reinforcing the tension with the inference from early Universe probes, for example, with 2.2$σ$ discrepancy from the cosmic microwave background measurement.

preprint2020arXiv

TDCOSMO. I. An exploration of systematic uncertainties in the inference of $H_0$ from time-delay cosmography

Time-delay cosmography of lensed quasars has achieved 2.4% precision on the measurement of the Hubble constant, $H_0$. As part of an ongoing effort to uncover and control systematic uncertainties, we investigate three potential sources: 1- stellar kinematics, 2- line-of-sight effects, and 3- the deflector mass model. To meet this goal in a quantitative way, we reproduced the H0LiCOW/SHARP/STRIDES (hereafter TDCOSMO) procedures on a set of real and simulated data, and we find the following. First, stellar kinematics cannot be a dominant source of error or bias since we find that a systematic change of 10% of measured velocity dispersion leads to only a 0.7% shift on $H_0$ from the seven lenses analyzed by TDCOSMO. Second, we find no bias to arise from incorrect estimation of the line-of-sight effects. Third, we show that elliptical composite (stars + dark matter halo), power-law, and cored power-law mass profiles have the flexibility to yield a broad range in $H_0$ values. However, the TDCOSMO procedures that model the data with both composite and power-law mass profiles are informative. If the models agree, as we observe in real systems owing to the "bulge-halo" conspiracy, $H_0$ is recovered precisely and accurately by both models. If the two models disagree, as in the case of some pathological models illustrated here, the TDCOSMO procedure either discriminates between them through the goodness of fit, or it accounts for the discrepancy in the final error bars provided by the analysis. This conclusion is consistent with a reanalysis of six of the TDCOSMO (real) lenses: the composite model yields $74.0^{+1.7}_{-1.8}$ $km.s^{-1}.Mpc^{-1}$, while the power-law model yields $H_0=74.2^{+1.6}_{-1.6}$ $km.s^{-1}.Mpc^{-1}$. In conclusion, we find no evidence of bias or errors larger than the current statistical uncertainties reported by TDCOSMO.