English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We present results from a comprehensive lensing analysis in HST data, of thecomplete CLASH cluster sample. We identify new multiple-images previouslyundiscovered allowing improved or first constraints on the cluster inner massdistributions and profiles. We combine these strong-lensing constraints withweak-lensing shape measurements within the HST FOV to jointly constrain themass distributions. The analysis is performed in two different commonparameterizations (one adopts light-traces-mass for both galaxies and darkmatter while the other adopts an analytical, elliptical NFW form for the darkmatter), to provide a better assessment of the underlying systematics - whichis most important for deep, cluster-lensing surveys, especially when studyingmagnified high-redshift objects. We find that the typical (median), relativesystematic differences throughout the central FOV are $\sim40\%$ in the(dimensionless) mass density, $\kappa$, and $\sim20\%$ in the magnification,$\mu$. We show maps of these differences for each cluster, as well as the massdistributions, critical curves, and 2D integrated mass profiles. For theEinstein radii ($z_{s}=2$) we find that all typically agree within $10\%$between the two models, and Einstein masses agree, typically, within$\sim15\%$. At larger radii, the total projected, 2D integrated mass profilesof the two models, within $r\sim2\arcmin$, differ by $\sim30\%$. Stacking thesurface-density profiles of the sample from the two methods together, we obtainan average slope of $d\log (\Sigma)/d\log(r)\sim-0.64\pm0.1$, in the radialrange [5,350] kpc. Lastly, we also characterize the behavior of the averagemagnification, surface density, and shear differences between the two models,as a function of both the radius from the center, and the best-fit values ofthese quantities.

Hubble Space Telescope Combined Strong and Weak Lensing Analysis of the CLASH Sample: Mass and Magnification Models and Systematic Uncertainties