Cited by 12Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesGamma-ray bursts and supernovae

Cosmology with supernova Encore in the strong lensing cluster MACS J0138−2155: Photometry, cluster members, and lens mass model

Open access
Ertl, S., Suyu, S. H., Schuldt, S., Granata, G., Grillo, C., Caminha, G. B., Acebron, A., Bergamini, P. +18 more·2025·Astronomy & Astrophysics

Abstract

The strongly lensed supernova (SN) Encore, at a redshift of z = 1.949 and discovered behind the galaxy cluster MACS J0138−2155 at z = 0.336, provides a rare opportunity for time-delay cosmography and studies of the SN host galaxy, where previously another SN, called SN Requiem, had appeared. To enable these studies, we combined new James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) imaging, archival Hubble Space Telescope (HST) imaging, and new Very Large Telescope (VLT) spectroscopic data to construct state-of-the-art lens mass models that are composed of cluster dark-matter (DM) haloes and galaxies. We fitted the surface brightness distributions of the galaxies in the field of view using Sérsic profiles to determine their photometric and structural parameters across six JWST and five HST filters. We used the colour-magnitude and colour-colour relations of spectroscopically confirmed cluster members to select additional cluster members, and identified a total of 84 galaxies belonging to the galaxy cluster. We constructed seven different mass models using a variety of DM halo mass profiles and explored both multi-plane and approximate single-plane lens models. As constraints, we used the observed positions of 23 multiple images from eight multiple image systems that originate from four galaxies with distinct spectroscopic redshifts in the range of 0.767–3.420. In addition, we used stellar velocity dispersion measurements to obtain priors on the galaxy mass distributions. We find that six of the seven models fit well to the observed image positions, with a root-mean-square (rms) scatter of ≤0.032″ between the model-predicted and observed positions for systems identified with JWST and HST images, including SN Encore and SN Requiem (the rms scatter is 0.24″ for all positions, including those identified with MUSE images). Mass models with cored-isothermal DM profiles fit well to the observations, whereas the mass model with a Navarro-Frenk-White cluster DM profile has an image-position χ 2 value that is four times higher. We built our ultimate model by combining four multi-lens-plane mass models in order to incorporate uncertainties due to model parameterizations. Our two approximate mass models with a single-lens plane allow us to perform direct comparisons with single-plane models built independently by other teams. Using our ultimate model, we predict the image positions and magnifications of SN Encore and SN Requiem. We also provide the effective convergence and shear of SN Encore for micro-lensing studies. Our work lays the foundation for building state-of-the-art mass models of the cluster for future cosmological analysis and SN host galaxy studies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1051/0004-6361/202554477

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lens modeling choices still have a large effect on predicted magnifications near the critical curves: our model agrees more closely with Acebron et al. [38] than with Ertl et al. [37].

    “Lens modeling choices still have a large effect on predicted magnifications near the critical curves: our model agrees more closely with Acebron et al. [38] (which similarly used one cluster halo and an external shear) than it does with Ertl et al. [37] (which used two halos to describe the cluster DM, and no external shear).”

    From Constraint on dark matter self-interaction from combined strong lensing and stellar kinematics in MACS J0138-2155 (2026) · cites this paper as Ertl et al. [37]

    Section 5.1.2 (p. 12) confirms that Ertl et al. modeled the cluster dark matter with two halo components. Our copy does not establish the citing authors’ comparison with Acebron et al. or explicitly state that Ertl et al. used no external shear. Section 6.2 (p. 15) says Ertl et al.’s models yielded mostly consistent magnifications within 1σ, rather than documenting a large effect near critical curves. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Compared to [37], we predict |μ| approximately 20% lower for the observed image groups (a,b,c).

    “Compared to [37], we predict | µ | approximately 20% lower for the observed image groups (a,b,c).”
  • Our joint model's critical curves appear very consistent with the newest mass models.

    “While the critical curves can only enable a qualitative comparison, we note that ours appear very consistent with the newest mass models, see Fig. 1 of [38] and Fig. 8 of [37].”
  • Our joint model magnifications are in clear agreement with those reported in Suyu et al. [86], including [37, 38], with the magnifications of all observed sources within the 1σ errors of those in [38], and slightly below the absolute magnifications predicted by [37].

    “Our joint model magnifications are in clear agreement with those reported in Suyu et al. [86], including [37, 38], with the magnifications of all observed sources within the 1 σ errors of those in [38], and slightly below the absolute magnifications predicted by [37].”
  • Agreement between our predicted magnifications and those in [37, 38] does not exclude systematic effects distorting the true magnifications, but it is encouraging that these models agree with ours despite substantial differences in approach.

    “While agreement between our predicted magnifications and those in [37, 38] does not exclude systematic effects distorting the true magnifications, it is encouraging that these models agree with ours despite substantial differences in approach.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bacon, R., Accardo, M., Adjali, L., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 7735, Groundbased and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. I. S. McLean, S. K. Ramsay, & H. Takami, 773508
  2. Courbin, F., Eigenbrod, A., Vuissoz, C., Meylan, G., & Magain, P. 2004, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, 2004, 297
  3. El´ ıasd´ ottir, ´ A., Limousin, M., Richard, J., et al. 2007, ArXiv e-prints (0710.5636)
  4. Freedman, W. L. & Madore, B. F. 2023, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2023, 050
  5. Michalewicz, K., Millon, M., Dux, F., & Courbin, F. 2023, Journal of Open Source Software, 8, 5340
  6. Yeung, S. & Chu, M. C. 2022, Physical Review D, 105, 083508

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ertl, S., Suyu, S. H., Schuldt, S., Granata, G., Grillo, C., Caminha, G. B., Acebron, A., Bergamini, P., Cañameras, R., Cha, S., Diego, J. M., Foo, N., Frye, B. L., Fudamoto, Y., Halkola, A., Jee, M. J., Kamieneski, P. S., Koekemoer, A. M., Meena, A. K., Nishida, S., Oguri, M., Pierel, J. D. R., Rosati, P., Tortorelli, L., Wang, H., & Zitrin, A.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics (DE)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Instituto de Física de Cantabria (CSIC-UC)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Yonsei University (KR)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Pyörrekuja 5 A
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Space Telescope Science Institute (US)
  • Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
  • Chiba University (JP)
  • University of Ferrara (IT)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Venue
Astronomy & Astrophysics
Publisher
EDP Sciences
Published
2025-10
Volume
702
Pages
A157
ISSN
  • 0004-6361 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0746
OpenAlex
W4413844800
Cited by
12
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 2
FWCI
4.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Ferrara (University of Ferrara) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (390783311, 2109066, 864/23, NAS 5-26555, 2020750)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (5-03127, NAS5-03127, HF2-51541.001, HST-GO-16264, NAS 526555, 526555)
  • Space Telescope Science Institute (NAS5-03127, GO-16264, NAS5- 26555, 5-26555, 5-03127, 26555, HST-GO-16264)
  • Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (PID2022-138896NB, PID2022, PID2022-138896NB-C51)
  • European Commission (771776, 16264)
  • National Research Foundation (RS-2023-00219959, 2022R1A2C1003130)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EXC 2094390783311, EXC 2094, 390783311, NAS 5-26555)
  • United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (2109066, 2020750)
  • Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (2020SKSTHZ, 2017WSCC32, PRIN-MIUR 2017WSCC32)
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (22K21349, 23K13149)
  • Agencia Estatal de Investigación (2020750)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Gamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Keywords
time-delay cosmography, strong gravitational lensing, lens mass models, dark matter halos, cluster member galaxies, Sérsic profiles, stellar velocity dispersion, supernova host galaxies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review