Interlopers speak out: studying the dark universe using small-scale lensing anisotropies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Strongly lensed systems are powerful probes of the distribution of dark matter on small scales. In this paper, we show that line-of-sight haloes between the source and the observers give rise to a distinct anisotropic signature in the two-point function of the effective lensing deflection field. We show in particular that the non-linear coupling between line-of-sight haloes and the main lens plane imprints a characteristic quadrupole moment on this two-point function whose amplitude reflects the abundance of such haloes within the strongly lensed field. We discuss how, by taking ratios of different multipole moments, such observables could be made robust under the mass-sheet transform. We also demonstrate that future extremely large telescopes have the ability to detect the quadrupole moment due to this unique anisotropic signature under ideal conditions. Our approach opens the door to statistically distinguish the effect of line-of-sight haloes from that of the main-lens substructure on lensed images, hence allowing one to probe dark matter physics in a new way.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".