Estimating the warm dark matter mass from strong lensing images with truncated marginal neural ratio estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Precision analysis of galaxy–galaxy strong gravitational lensing images provides a unique way of characterizing small-scale dark matter haloes, and could allow us to uncover the fundamental properties of dark matter’s constituents. Recently, gravitational imaging techniques made it possible to detect a few heavy subhaloes. However, gravitational lenses contain numerous subhaloes and line-of-sight haloes, whose subtle imprint is extremely difficult to detect individually. Existing methods for marginalizing over this large population of subthreshold perturbers to infer population-level parameters are typically computationally expensive, or require compressing observations into hand-crafted summary statistics, such as a power spectrum of residuals. Here, we present the first analysis pipeline to combine parametric lensing models and a recently developed neural simulation-based inference technique called truncated marginal neural ratio estimation (TMNRE) to constrain the warm dark matter halo mass function cut-off scale directly from multiple lensing images. Through a proof-of-concept application to simulated data, we show that our approach enables empirically testable inference of the dark matter cut-off mass through marginalization over a large population of realistic perturbers that would be undetectable on their own, and over lens and source parameter uncertainties. To obtain our results, we combine the signal contained in a set of images with Hubble Space Telescope resolution. Our results suggest that TMNRE can be a powerful approach to put tight constraints on the mass of warm dark matter in the multi-keV regime, which will be relevant both for existing lensing data and in the large sample of lenses that will be delivered by near-future telescopes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".