Gravitational Lensing Analysis of CLASH clusters Adi HD 10/2011

Outline of talk What have we done so far: clusters analyzed, methods, strong vs weak, recent developments What do we need to do by the next CLASH meeting How do we plan to do that

Bank of tools: Strong lensing: parametric method – ideal for finding multiple-images and to obtain a quick solution due to the small number of parameters. - Dan’s non-parametric method – very flexible and fast once multiple-images are known. -Stella’s etal parametric method. -Other public methods such as Lenstool etc for comparison if needed. Else?

Bank of tools: Weak lensing: -Keiichi’s WL method (KSB based, Elinor’s color selection,Mario&Alberto). Both 1D, 2D analyses, recently including, importantly, a magnification bias constraint. - Keiichi’s multi-body method – same as above but by simulating several bodies – often seen also in background etc. -Claudio’s HST WL? -Stella’s etal, others?

Bank of tools: Joint analysis: -One could combine independent SL and WL measurements, and say, fit an overall NFW profile etc. SL+WL joint analysis method. Effect of LSS: -Ole, Ofer etal. Triaxiality fit: - Lensing+X-ray, SZ(?) – Dan, Megan etal

What have we done so far?

Abell 383 SL+WL analysis, Paper accepted:

MACS 1206 SL analysis; Paper submitted ApJL

A2261 Paper ~ready, Coe etal, SL+WL, elongation, CM

A2261

Some preliminary models for cycle 18 clusters: M11495M0744 M0647M2129

Macs 0717 largest lens known

Status and To-Do: In our lensing session tmrw we also need to decide on who does what

What do we wish to study: 1. Mass profiles (jointly)

1a. Mass Profiles: establish an observational C-M relation, and the effect of triaxiality: What do we wish to study:

1b. Magnification for High-z galaxies

2a. Mass distribution: Strong regime: ellipticity, subtructure, effect on SL properties What do we wish to study:

2b. Mass distribution: weak regime: multi- halo analysis and background structures What do we wish to study: BTW - More CCLs?

2c: Mass distribution: constrain and calibrate the universal Einstein radius distribution: 2d: Mass distribution: both regimes: how does DM condensate and concentrate? Could be put constraints on this? Tom? Leonidas? What do we wish to study:

3. Constraints on the (higher end of) mass function 4. Comparison to simulations, maybe look into over-cooling, feedback influence, adiabatic contraction What do we wish to study:

5. Constraining the cosmological parameters: Dependence of the lensing distance (AD_dist) on the cosmological parameters. By Assuming different cosmologies one can probe the best fit (In prep., e.g.): Zitrin + in prep. Jullo What do we wish to study:

6. Very inner slopes, especially of/inside BCG regime. Need SL constraints from radial images, light  SF, velocity dispersion etc. Newman et al: What do we wish to study:

Recent Development MIF: fully automated Multiple-Image Finder Goal: one button press to get a list of all multiple-images, with their redshift, and a refined lens or mass model. Possible? Tryout: Gregor’s ArcFinder, BPZ (Txitxo, Alberto, Dan), Adi’s mass model: combined. Let’s see a first result compared to a real analysis:

Multiple-Image Finder: Runtime of 1-2 days to finalized mass model!! (relative to ~1 month’s work before)

Recent 2 M1206 ref report + model-independent mass slope from multiple images (also for photo-z paper estimate on how errors propagate into the mass profile).

Summary: Many more CLASH clusters to analyze in SL, WL, derive mass distributions, profiles and Einstein radii, compare explicitly with X-ray, SZE, simulations. C-M relation CCL? cD galaxies: M and M/L ratio and profile where multiple images are near. Inner profile High-z galaxies Constraints on cosmological models (later today) Development of a tool for multiple-image finding Details to be discussed in sessions