Paper detail

TDCOSMO. VII. Boxyness/discyness in lensing galaxies : Detectability and impact on $H_0$

In the context of gravitational lensing, the density profile of lensing galaxies is often considered to be perfectly elliptical. Potential angular structures are generally ignored, except to explain flux ratios anomalies. Surprisingly, the impact of azimuthal structures on extended images of the source has not been characterized, nor its impact on the H0 inference. We address this task by creating mock images of a point source embedded in an extended source, lensed by an elliptical galaxy on which multipolar components are added to emulate boxy/discy isodensity contours. Modeling such images with a density profile free of angular structure allow us to explore the detectability of image deformation induced by the multipoles in the residual frame. Multipole deformations are almost always detectable for our highest signal-to-noise mock data. However the detectability depends on the lens ellipticity and Einstein radius, on the S/N of the data, and on the specific lens modeling strategy. Multipoles also introduce small changes to the time delays. We therefore quantify how undetected multipoles would impact H0 inference. When no multipoles are detected in the residuals, the impact on H0 for a given lens is in general less than a few km/s/Mpc, but in the worst case scenario, combining low S/N in the ring and large intrinsic boxyness/discyness, the bias on H0 can reach 10-12 km/s/Mpc. If we now look at the inference on H0 from a population of lensing galaxies, having a distribution of multipoles representative of what is found in the light-profile of elliptical galaxies, we then find a systematic bias on H0 < 1%. The comparison of our mock systems to the state-of-the-art time delay lens sample studied by the H0LiCOW and TDCOSMO collaborations, indicates that multipoles are currently unlikely to be a source of substantial systematic bias on the inferred value of H0 from time-delay lenses.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.