Mining for Dark Matter Substructure: Inferring Subhalo Population Properties from Strong Lenses with Machine Learning
Open accessAbstract
The subtle and unique imprint of dark matter substructure on extended arcs in strong-lensing systems contains a wealth of information about the properties and distribution of dark matter on small scales and, consequently, about the underlying particle physics. However, teasing out this effect poses a significant challenge since the likelihood function for realistic simulations of population-level parameters is intractable. We apply recently developed simulation-based inference techniques to the problem of substructure inference in galaxy–galaxy strong lenses. By leveraging additional information extracted from the simulator, neural networks are efficiently trained to estimate likelihood ratios associated with population-level parameters characterizing substructure. Through proof-of-principle application to simulated data, we show that these methods can provide an efficient and principled way to simultaneously analyze an ensemble of strong lenses and can be used to mine the large sample of lensing images deliverable by near-future surveys for signatures of dark matter substructure. We find that, within our simplified modeling framework, analyzing a sample of around 100 lenses can already pin down the overall abundance of substructure within lensing galaxies to a precision of % with greater sensitivity expected from a larger lens sample. ( https://github.com/smsharma/StrongLensing-Inference )
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Brehmer et al. (2019) concluded that ∼100 strong lenses might be enough for characterising the abundance of substructure down to ∼10%.
“They conclude that ∼ 100 strong lenses might be enough for characterising the abundance of substructure down to ∼ 10%.”
From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Brehmer et al. (2019)
Brehmer et al. (2019) showed, in a proof-of-concept application to simulated data, that neural networks can be trained to accurately estimate likelihood ratios associated to dark matter substructure parameters.
“The authors characterise substructure with a set of parameters and show, in a proof-of-concept application to simulated data, that neural networks can be trained to accurately estimate likelihood ratios associated to the dark matter substructure parameters”
From The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys (2023) · cites this paper as Brehmer et al. (2019)
Cites
WaveNet: a generative model for raw audio
Oord, A. V. D., Dieleman, S., Zen, H., Simonyan, K., Vinyals, O., Graves, A., Kalchbrenner, N., Senior, A., & Kavukcuoglu, K. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1609.03499 · Cited by 4,911 · see citing works
Neural ordinary differential equations
Chen, R. T. Q., Rubanova, Y., Bettencourt, J., & Duvenaud, D. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1806.07366 · Cited by 2,097 · see citing works
Gravitational detection of a low-mass dark satellite galaxy at cosmological distance
Vegetti, S., Lagattuta, D. J., McKean, J. P., Auger, M. W., Fassnacht, C. D., & Koopmans, L. V. E. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10669 · Cited by 386 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Dawes Review 10: The impact of deep learning for the analysis of galaxy surveys
Huertas-Company, M., & Lanusse, F. (2023) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia · doi:10.1017/pasa.2022.55 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
“The first work exploring this is by Brehmer et al. (2019).”
BackgroundChianese, M., Coogan, A., Hofma, P., Otten, S., & Weniger, C. (2020) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1477 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Prasha, A. A., Rachmadi, C. O., Syahlan, M. F. I., Anugerah, N. R., Raditya, N. G., Amelia, P., Mutiara, S. L., & Ramadhan, H. S. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.06642
“Beyond classification, deep learning has been used for regression of substructure parameters: Brehmer et al. (2019) and Montel et al. (2022) employed simulation-based inference techniques (such as likelihood-free neural inference) to infer the subhalo mass function from lensing data, treating the…”
- Authors
- Brehmer, J., Mishra-Sharma, S., Hermans, J., Louppe, G., & Cranmer, K.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- University of Liège (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Brehmer, Johann
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2019-11-19
- Volume
- 886
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2971647774
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 6.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (acceptedVersion)
- ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (ACI-1450310, OAC-1836650, OAC-1841471, PHY-1554858, PHY-1620727, PHY-1915409, PHY-1505463)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations
- Keywords
- dark matter substructure, strong gravitational lensing, galaxy-galaxy lensing, simulation-based inference, artificial neural networks, likelihood ratio estimation, lensing surveys
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