Paper detail

SARCS strong-lensing galaxy groups: II - mass-concentration relation and strong-lensing bias

Our work is based on the stacked weak-lensing analysis of a sample of 80 strong-lensing galaxy groups. Our main results are the following: (i) the lensing signal does not allow us to firmly reject a simple singular isothermal sphere mass distribution compared to the expected NFW mass profile; (ii) we obtain an average concentration $c_{200}=8.6_{-1.3}^{+2.1}$ that is much higher than the expected value from numerical simulations for the corresponding average mass $M_{200}=0.73_{-0.10}^{+0.11}\times10^{14}\mathrm{M_{\odot}}$; (iii) the combination of our results with those at larger mass scales gives a mass-concentration relation $c(M)$ over nearly two decades in mass, with a slope in disagreement with predictions from numerical simulations using unbiased populations of dark matter haloes; (iv) our combined $c(M)$ relation matches results from simulations using only haloes with a large strong-lensing cross section, i.e. elongated with a major axis close to the line of sight; (v) for the simplest case of prolate haloes, we estimate with a toy model a lower limit on the minor:major axis ratio $a/c=0.5$ for the average SARCS galaxy group. Our analysis based on galaxy groups confirmed the results obtained at larger mass scales: strong lenses present apparently too large concentrations, which can be explained by triaxial haloes preferentially oriented with the line of sight. Because more massive systems already have large lensing cross sections, they do not require a large elongation along the line of sight, contrary to less massive galaxy groups. Therefore, it is natural to observe larger lensing (projected) concentrations for such systems, resulting in an overall mass-concentration relation steeper than that of non-lensing haloes.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.