PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 10, 2026Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society1 citationsOpen Access

Time delay measurements with Broken Power Law model

View Full Paper
GRGuanhua RuiBHBin HuWDWei Du

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate how different lens mass profiles influence time-delay measurements in strong gravitational lensing systems.
  • Implemented a Broken Power Law (BPL) mass model in the Lenstronomy framework.
  • Validated the BPL model using simulated lens systems and compared it with the elliptical power-law (EPL) model.
  • Applied both models to analyze quad-imaged quasar WGD 2038–4008.
  • For the BPL model, H0 was estimated at 75.2 km/s/Mpc with a 95% CI of +23.0/-16.3.
  • For the EPL model, H0 was estimated at 61.1 km/s/Mpc with a 95% CI of +19.1/-13.1.
  • Variation in the mass-profile assumptions shows a significant impact on the estimated Hubble constant.

Abstract

Abstract One of the key challenges in strong gravitational lensing cosmography is the accurate measurement of time delays between multiple lensed images, which are essential for constraining the Hubble constant (H0). In this study, we investigate how assumptions about the lens mass profile affect time-delay measurements in strong lensing systems. Specifically, we implement a Broken Power Law (BPL) mass model within the Lenstronomy framework (Birrer & Amara 2018), which introduces additional flexibility in the radial mass distribution and can phenomenologically capture deviations from a single power-law profile. This model is combined with a numerical approach to compute time delays at the image positions. We validate the BPL implementation using simulated lens systems and compare the results with those obtained from the commonly adopted elliptical power-law (EPL) model. We then apply both model families to the quadruply imaged quasar WGD 2038–4008. Both models provide good fits to the imaging and kinematic data overall, with a slight preference for the BPL model. When the internal mass-sheet factor is allowed to vary, the inferred Hubble constant in a flat ΛCDM cosmology with fixed Ωm = 0. 3 is H₀ = 75. 2^+23. 0-₁₆. ₃ \ km \ s^-1 \ Mpc^{-1} for the BPL model and H₀ = 61. 1^+19. 1-₁₃. ₁ \ km \ s^-1 \ Mpc^{-1} for the EPL model. For comparison, in the diagnostic case with the internal mass-sheet factor fixed to unity under the same setup, we obtain H₀ = 74. 2^+20. 3-₁₃. ₈ \ km \ s^-1 \ Mpc^{-1} for the BPL model and H₀ = 66. 1^+18. 8-₁₂. ₈ \ km \ s^-1 \ Mpc^{-1} for the EPL model. This highlights how time-delay cosmography remains sensitive to assumptions about the lens mass profile. With current precision, this difference does not favour one cosmological scenario over another, but rather underscores the importance of flexible mass modeling.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Rui et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a002087c8f74e3340f9b5d5https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag796
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper