<i>JWST</i> lensed quasar dark matter survey – II. Strongest gravitational lensing limit on the dark matter free streaming length to date
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This is the second in a series of papers in which we use JWST Mid Infrared Instrument multiband imaging to measure the warm dust emission in a sample of 31 multiply imaged quasars, to be used as a probe of the particle nature of dark matter. We present measurements of the relative magnifications of the strongly lensed warm dust emission in a sample of nine systems. The warm dust region is compact and sensitive to perturbations by populations of haloes down to masses $\sim 10^6$ M$_{\odot }$. Using these warm dust flux-ratio measurements in combination with five previous narrow-line flux-ratio measurements, we constrain the halo mass function. In our model, we allow for complex deflector macromodels with flexible third- and fourth-order multipole deviations from ellipticity, and we introduce an improved model of the tidal evolution of subhaloes. We constrain a WDM model and find an upper limit on the half-mode mass of $10^{7.6}\, {\rm M}_\odot$ at posterior odds of 10:1. This corresponds to a lower limit on a thermally produced dark matter particle mass of 6.1 keV. This is the strongest gravitational lensing constraint to date, and comparable to those from independent probes such as the Ly $\alpha$ forest and Milky Way satellite galaxies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".