DETECTION OF LENSING SUBSTRUCTURE USING ALMA OBSERVATIONS OF THE DUSTY GALAXY SDP.81
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We study the abundance of substructure in the matter density near galaxies using ALMA Science Verification observations of the strong lensing system SDP.81. We present a method to measure the abundance of subhalos around galaxies using interferometric observations of gravitational lenses. Using simulated ALMA observations we explore the effects of various systematics, including antenna phase errors and source priors, and show how such errors may be measured or marginalized. We apply our formalism to ALMA observations of SDP.81. We find evidence for the presence of a M = 10 8.96±0.12 M ⊙ subhalo near one of the images, with a significance of 6.9 σ in a joint fit to data from bands 6 and 7; the effect of the subhalo is also detected in both bands individually. We also derive constraints on the abundance of dark matter (DM) subhalos down to M ∼ 2 × 10 7 M ⊙ , pushing down to the mass regime of the smallest detected satellites in the Local Group, where there are significant discrepancies between the observed population of luminous galaxies and predicted DM subhalos. We find hints of additional substructure, warranting further study using the full SDP.81 data set (including, for example, the spectroscopic imaging of the lensed carbon monoxide emission). We compare the results of this search to the predictions of ΛCDM halos, and find that given current uncertainties in the host halo properties of SDP.81, our measurements of substructure are consistent with theoretical expectations. Observations of larger samples of gravitational lenses with ALMA should be able to improve the constraints on the abundance of galactic substructure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".