Search

ABSTRACT We study the Sloan Lens ACS (SLACS) survey strong-lensing system SDSS J1430+4105 at zl = 0.285. The lensed source ( zs = 0.575) of this system has a complex morphology with several subcomponents. Its subcomponents span a radial range from 4 to 10 kpc in the plane of the lens. Therefore, we can constrain the slope of the total projected mass profile around the Einstein radius from lensing alone. We measure a density profile that is slightly but not significantly shallower than isothermal at the Einstein radius. We decompose the mass of the lensing galaxy into a de Vaucouleurs component to trace the stars and an additional dark component. The spread of multiple-image components over a large radial range also allows us to determine the amplitude of the de Vaucouleurs and dark matter components separately. We get a mass-to-light ratio of [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We showcase machine learning (ML) inspired target selection algorithms to determine which of all potential targets should be selected first for spectroscopic follow-up. Efficient target selection can improve the ML redshift uncertainties as calculated on an independent sample, while requiring less targets to be observed. We compare seven different ML targeting algorithms with the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) target order, and with a random targeting algorithm. The ML inspired algorithms are constructed iteratively by estimating which of the remaining target galaxies will be most difficult for the ML methods to accurately estimate redshifts using the previously observed data. This is performed by predicting the expected redshift error and redshift offset (or bias) of all of the remaining target galaxies. We find that the predicted values of bias and error are accurate to better than 10-30 per cent of the true values, even with only limited training sample sizes. We construct a hypothetical follow-up survey and find that some of the ML targeting algorithms are able to obtain the same redshift predictive power with 2-3 times less observing time, as compared to that of the SDSS, or random, target selection algorithms. The reduction in the required follow-up resources could allow for a change to the follow-up strategy, for example by obtaining deeper spectroscopy, which could improve ML redshift estimates for deeper test data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present analyses of data augmentation for machine learning redshift estimation. Data augmentation makes a training sample more closely resemble a test sample, if the two base samples differ, in order to improve measured statistics of the test sample.We perform two sets of analyses by selecting 800 000 (1.7 million) Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 8 (Data Release 10) galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts.We construct a base training set by imposing an artificial r-band apparent magnitude cut to select only bright galaxies and then augment this base training set by using simulations and by applying the K-CORRECT package to artificially place training set galaxies at a higher redshift. We obtain redshift estimates for the remaining faint galaxy sample, which are not used during training.We find that data augmentation reduces the error on the recovered redshifts by 40 per cent in both sets of analyses, when compared to the difference in error between the ideal case and the non-augmented case. The outlier fraction is also reduced by at least 10 per cent and up to 80 per cent using data augmentation.We finally quantify how the recovered redshifts degrade as one probes to deeper magnitudes past the artificial magnitude limit of the bright training sample.We find that at all apparent magnitudes explored, the use of data augmentation with tree-based methods provide an estimate of the galaxy redshift with a low value of bias, although the error on the recovered redshifts increases as we probe to deeper magnitudes. These results have applications for surveys which have a spectroscopic training set which forms a biased sample of all photometric galaxies, for example if the spectroscopic detection magnitude limit is shallower than the photometric limit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]