Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 289 references

This paper presents the third-generation LoVoCCS data-reduction pipeline and uses it to measure the weak-lensing mass of the Hercules supercluster core at about 9e14 solar masses, arguing that Abell 2147's dynamical mass is inflated because

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 20:59 UTC pith:HI4LHYEH

load-bearing objection A solid pipeline paper with a serious arithmetic inconsistency in its headline dynamical-state claim; the lensing mass measurement itself is plausible and worth engaging with. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.16417 v1 pith:HI4LHYEH submitted 2026-07-17 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO

LoVoCCS. III. Third Generation Pipeline & The Hercules Supercluster

Anthony M. Englert , Shenming Fu , Ian Dell'Antonio , Mohamed H. Abdullah , Shrouk Abdulshafy , Eddie Aljamal , William K. Black , Nicole Chidester
show 24 more authors
Doug Clowe M. C. Cooper Megan Donahue Zacharias Escalante August Evrard Eric Habjan Soren Helhoski Binyang Liu Jacqueline McCleary Hironao Miyatake Mireia Montes Priyamvada Natarajan Jessica Nelson Michelle Ntampaka Elena Pierpaoli Marc Postman Rahul Shinde Jubee Sohn Fuyuko Tanaka David Turner Keiichi Umetsu Yousuke Utsumi Ray Wang Gillian Wilson
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO
keywords weak gravitational lensinggalaxy clusterssuperclustersHercules superclusterAbell 2147dynamical mass biasmerger timingLSST Science Pipelines
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper has two goals: introduce the upgraded 'Gen3' pipeline for reducing deep optical images of nearby galaxy clusters, and prove it works by measuring the mass of the Hercules supercluster from the weak gravitational lensing of background galaxies. It finds the dense core of Hercules, containing Abell 2147, 2151, 2152 and two smaller clumps, has a total lensing mass of about 9 x 10^14 solar masses. More sharply, it reports a >5-sigma disagreement between the dynamical and lensing masses of Abell 2147, and argues the simplest explanation is that the cluster is a recent post-pericenter merger, about 0.2-0.4 Gyr after closest approach, so its dynamical mass is temporarily inflated. If true, this is a direct demonstration that dynamical masses of merging clusters can be badly biased, which matters for any effort to build cluster mass calibrations from galaxy velocities.

Core claim

The central result is a weak-lensing measurement of the Hercules supercluster core. Using multi-plane lens models fit to metadetect-calibrated shears from DECam data, the paper finds the total lensing mass of the complex to be 8.9^+1.7_-1.4 x 10^14 M_sun. For Abell 2147, the lensing mass is 3.2^+0.9_-0.8 x 10^14 M_sun, against a dynamical mass of about 13.5 x 10^14 M_sun — a >5-sigma discrepancy. Working from the lensing mass and assuming A2147S was the 'main cluster' in a 1:3 mass-ratio merger, the paper applies simulated dynamical-mass enhancement factors (x1.3 for the main, x3 for the sub-cluster) to predict an enhanced dynamical mass of ~6.0e14 M_sun, consistent with the observed dynamic

What carries the argument

The key machinery is a multi-plane weak-lensing model that recursively computes the lensing Jacobian through several lens planes, combined with the metadetect shear self-calibration, the aperture-mass statistic with a Schirmer filter for peak detection, and comparison of lensing masses to dynamical masses corrected by merger-simulation bias factors (x1.3 main, x3 sub-cluster for a 1:3 mass-ratio merger). The central object doing the work is the composite deflector model, which allows foreground and background halos to be fit and marginalized simultaneously.

Load-bearing premise

The 0.2-0.4 Gyr timing rests on the assumption that Abell 2147 can be modeled as a 1:3 mass-ratio merger with A2147S as the main cluster, and that the simulated dynamical-mass enhancement factors (x1.3 for the main, x3 for the sub-cluster) apply directly to this system; if the geometry or clump assignment is different, the timing inference is unsupported even if the total lensing mass is correct.

What would settle it

A deep X-ray map of Abell 2147 that does not show the shock/heated ICM pattern expected shortly after a 1:3 mass-ratio core crossing, or a spectroscopic measurement of the relative velocity of A2147N and A2147S indicating a crossing time outside ~0.2-0.4 Gyr, would challenge the periapsis timing; alternatively, a hydro/N-body simulation of the same orbital configuration that yields a different dynamical-mass bias would break the chain.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The Hercules core has a lensing mass of about 9 x 10^14 solar masses, near the low end expected for gravitationally bound supercluster cores, and is dominated by A2147, A2151, and Clump A.
  • Abell 2147's dynamical mass is inflated by roughly a factor of 2.3; the >5-sigma disagreement means merger state must be accounted for when using velocity-based masses for clusters.
  • The system passed periapsis about 0.2-0.4 Gyr ago, so it is observed in a short-lived merger phase; other nearby clusters may be similarly mis-assessed by dynamical methods.
  • The Gen3 pipeline is validated to near-LSST-Y1 depth with percent-level shear systematics, so the same tools can now be applied to the full LoVoCCS sample.
  • Background clusters along the line of sight can bias foreground mass estimates; explicitly modeling and marginalizing them, as done for A2152, is necessary for accurate per-cluster masses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the A2147 timing is right, deep X-ray observations should reveal merger shocks or a disturbed ICM morphology consistent with a recent core crossing; absent such evidence, the 1:3 mass-ratio assumption would need revisiting.
  • Applying the same multi-plane treatment to the full LoVoCCS sample could turn up more dynamically biased clusters, offering a way to measure how common merger states are in the local cluster population.
  • The paper's method of assigning statistical confidence to mass-map peaks by rotating galaxy shears in noise realizations could be adapted as a generic peak-significance tool for other surveys.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents the third-generation data-reduction pipeline for the LoVoCCS cluster survey (Gen3, based on LSST Science Pipelines v26), and validates it on deep DECam observations of the Hercules Supercluster. The validation includes astrometric and photometric scatter estimates, photo-z verification against 10,988 DESI spectra, shear null tests, PSF-leakage masking, and a comparison between metadetect and HSM shape catalogs. The science application is a multi-plane weak-lensing analysis of the ~16 deg^2 Hercules complex, yielding a total lensing mass of 8.9^+1.7_-1.4 x 10^14 M_sun and, for A2147, a dynamical-to-lensing mass discrepancy interpreted as evidence that A2147 is a recent post-pericenter merger (0.2-0.4 Gyr since periapsis).

Significance. If the results hold, this paper provides a carefully validated public pipeline for a volume-complete cluster survey and one of the first weak-lensing mass measurements of a supercluster core, with an interesting dynamical-state interpretation. The strengths are substantial: extensive pipeline validation (DESI-based photo-z scatter, null tests, PSF-leakage statistics, metadetect vs HSM), public code repository, explicit multi-plane lensing treatment, and masking of known systematics. These give reasonable confidence in the lensing mass estimates themselves. The dynamical-state conclusion, however, rests on a specific comparison to Monteiro-Oliveira et al. (2022) simulations that is not arithmetically supported as written, and is the paper's central novelty; that part needs major revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 6.2.1] The claimed 2σ consistency between the predicted and observed dynamical mass of A2147 is not reproducible from the quoted numbers. The paper states that the lensing masses of A2147N and A2147S are 1.2^+0.6_-0.5 and 2.0^+0.8_-0.7 x 10^14 M_sun, and that MO's enhancement factors are x1.3 (main) and x3 (sub). Using these values with A2147S as the main cluster gives 2.0x1.3 + 1.2x3 = 6.2 x 10^14 M_sun, close to the quoted ~6.0. Meanwhile the observed dynamical mass quoted in the same section is ~13.5^+2.1_-1.7 x 10^14 M_sun. The difference is ~7.3 x 10^14 M_sun; even adding 1σ errors in quadrature (~2.8 x 10^14 M_sun) gives a discrepancy of ~2.6-3σ, not 2σ. Moreover, 'the estimate from MO' is not defined; if it is the quoted 13.5 x 10^14 M_sun dynamical mass, then the two are inconsistent at >2σ. This arithmetic inconsistency directly undermines the 0.2-0.4 Gyr post-pericenter timing claim,
  2. [Section 6.2.1] The application of MO's simulated enhancement factors is not justified by the lensing-derived mass ratio. MO's factors are quoted for a 1:3 mass-ratio merger. However, the lensing masses derived in this paper imply a mass ratio of ~2.0/1.2 ≈ 1.7:1 for A2147S vs A2147N, not 1:3. The text does not address whether the enhancement factors are insensitive to the mass ratio over this range, and no uncertainty in the simulated factors themselves is propagated. Even if the total lensing mass is correct, the timing inference depends on these untested assumptions. The authors should either demonstrate that the enhancement factors are robust to the actual mass ratio, or reframe the dynamical-state claim with appropriate caveats.
  3. [Section 6.2] The quoted mass uncertainties (e.g., 8.9^+1.7_-1.4 x 10^14 M_sun) appear to be purely statistical, derived from the 4000 bootstrap resamplings described in Section 6.2. No systematic error budget is presented for shear calibration bias, photo-z biases, NFW concentration assumptions, or the choice of aperture/mass-map parameters. Given that the paper's conclusion of a >4σ dynamical-vs-lensing discrepancy is a key result, the absence of a systematic-error estimate makes the significance claims difficult to evaluate. Please add a systematic error budget or explicitly justify why these terms are negligible for the conclusions drawn.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] 'consistent with being ~0.2-0.4 Gyr out-of periapsis' is awkward phrasing; suggest 'since periapsis' or 'post-periapsis'.
  2. [Section 5.2] Figure 13: the photometric scatter panel would benefit from axis labels with explicit units and a legend for the bands, as the text refers to 'per-band' values but the figure does not clearly show all bands.
  3. [Section 5.4] Equation 47 and the surrounding text use R_jj notation but do not define j; it is presumably the component index. Please clarify.
  4. [Section 6.1] The description of how the noise-map peak distribution is 'Gaussianized' into a confidence level is somewhat terse. A brief explanation of the transformation from p(S) to a Gaussian σ would help reproducibility.
  5. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical issues (e.g., 'T able', 'metadetect' capitalization inconsistencies, 'lovoccs pipe' vs 'LoVoCCS'). A careful copyedit is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the lensing mass is an empirical fit to shear data, and the dynamical-state interpretation is anchored to an external simulation (MO), not to the paper's own fitted values.

full rationale

The central mass estimate (8.9^+1.7_-1.4 × 10^14 M_sun) is obtained by fitting NFW multi-plane lens models to metadetect-calibrated shears, with null tests (PSF-star correlations, star-map cross-correlations, aperture-mass cross-component) and external validation (DESI DR1 photo-z comparison, Pan-STARRS/SkyMapper photometry, Gaia astrometry). No parameter of the lensing fit is set by the dynamical masses being compared; the A2147 dynamical-bias claim rests on the externally published MO simulations and on the MO dynamical mass of A2147. The 'predicted enhanced dynamical mass' (~6.0e14) is computed by applying MO's enhancement factors to the lensing masses, so it is not a fitted parameter disguised as a prediction. The sentence claiming this is consistent with 'the estimate from MO at the 2σ level' is ambiguous: if 'estimate from MO' refers to the quoted dynamical mass of 13.5e14, the numbers do not agree at 2σ. That is a statistical/arithmetic concern about the support for the 0.2–0.4 Gyr timing, not a circularity in the derivation chain. Self-citations to LoVoCCS I/II and in-preparation works document pipeline heritage and future extensions; none is load-bearing for the Hercules mass or the dynamical-state conclusion.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on standard weak-lensing assumptions plus several modeling choices: a source redshift distribution from BPZ, NFW halo shapes, placement of all foreground structures at z=0.04, and a multi-plane model with background clusters. No new physical entities are introduced. The most consequential hidden inputs are the NFW concentration parameter and the mergers' mass-ratio/geometric assumptions used to interpret A2147's dynamical bias.

free parameters (3)
  • NFW concentration (or concentration-mass relation) = not stated
    The lens model assumes NFW deflectors (Section 6.2) but only masses are varied; NFW has two parameters, so c is either fixed by an unstated relation or is an extra fitted degree of freedom. This affects the predicted shear profile and therefore the fitted M200.
  • Aperture radius for mass maps = 20 arcmin
    Mass maps and peak catalogs used to define CL95/CLFZ scenes are computed with a single 20-arcmin Schirmer aperture (Sections 5-6.1); a different aperture changes which peaks are detected and hence the fitted masses.
  • Shape-catalog quality cuts = S>10, 0.3<res<0.9, blendedness<0.4, sigma_e/T<0.02, |r-i|<10, z_p>0.2
    Table 2 cuts are chosen partly from HSC/DES practice; they set the effective source density and residual PSF/selection biases entering the mass estimate.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption All Hercules structures are placed at z=0.04
    Footnote 32 says placing them at the median redshift is swamped by shape noise; however, Sigma_c and all derived masses scale with this redshift assumption.
  • domain assumption NFW profile is an adequate model for each deflector, with a known/assumed concentration
    Section 6.2 fits NFW masses; profile choice and concentration affect the inferred M200.
  • domain assumption BPZ photometric redshifts have no significant bias after z_p>0.2; ~5% scatter/5.3% outliers propagate only ~1-3% into the distance ratio
    Section 5.3 validates with DESI, but photo-z outliers and quality cuts affect the source redshift distribution and the lensing signal.
  • domain assumption Background optical cluster redshifts (redMaPPer/WHL/Legacy) locate the main line-of-sight deflectors well enough
    A2152 mass is strongly correlated with a z~0.13 background cluster (Section 6.2.2); if that redshift or mass modeling is wrong, the foreground mass is biased.
  • domain assumption MO's 1:3 merger simulation and the assumption that A2147S was the main cluster apply to A2147
    The 0.2-0.4 Gyr out-of-periapsis conclusion follows from applying MO's enhancement factors (x1.3/x3) to the WL mass (Section 6.2.1).
  • domain assumption Weak lensing shape noise dominates; intrinsic alignments and residual PSF leakage are below the quoted errors
    Null tests in Section 5.5 indicate PSF leakage is small and a leakage region is masked, but a full systematic budget is not propagated into the mass errors.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 44281 in / 15403 out tokens · 148860 ms · 2026-08-01T20:59:51.547806+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The Local Volume Complete Cluster Survey (LoVoCCS) is a volume-complete survey of over one-hundred nearby ($0.03 < z < 0.12$), X-ray luminous ($L_{500} > 10^{44} \text{ erg s}^{-1}$) galaxy clusters in the southern sky. Observations for the survey concluded in December 2025, reaching Vera C. Rubin Observatory's Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) Year 1-2 depth in each field and providing observations with $\lesssim 1"$ seeing for weak lensing science. In this paper, we present the latest pipeline for reducing observations using the third-generation of the LSST Science Pipelines. We use recent observations of the Hercules Supercluster to validate the pipeline's data-products and conduct an extensive multi-plane weak-lensing analysis of a $\sim 16 \text{ deg}^2$ complex covering Abell 2147, 2151, 2152, and several additional structures. We confirm that the dynamical mass of the complex is biased due to the dynamical state of Abell 2147, which is consistent with being $\sim 0.2-0.4 \text{ Gyr}$ out-of periapsis, and estimate that the total mass of the supercluster is $8.9^{+1.7}_{-1.4} \times 10^{14}~M_{\odot}$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.16417 by Anthony M. Englert, August Evrard, Binyang Liu, David Turner, Doug Clowe, Eddie Aljamal, Elena Pierpaoli, Eric Habjan, Fuyuko Tanaka, Gillian Wilson, Hironao Miyatake, Ian Dell'Antonio, Jacqueline McCleary, Jessica Nelson, Jubee Sohn, Keiichi Umetsu, Marc Postman, M. C. Cooper, Megan Donahue, Michelle Ntampaka, Mireia Montes, Mohamed H. Abdullah, Nicole Chidester, Priyamvada Natarajan, Rahul Shinde, Ray Wang, Shenming Fu, Shrouk Abdulshafy, Soren Helhoski, William K. Black, Yousuke Utsumi, Zacharias Escalante.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The complete sample of LoVoCCS clusters, col￾ored by their X-ray luminosity, and drawn over a Mollweide projection. The markers denote the origin of a cluster from our sample, including the original LoVoCCS catalog (LV; cir￾cle), the LoVoCCS-SZ extension (LV-SZ; star), the LoVoCC￾S-North extension (LV-N; triangle), and the archival exten￾sion (AR; cross). Clusters with incomplete observations are drawn wit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: A sketch of the Hercules Supercluster with the positions of major clumps starred; circles extend to their respective r200. Numbered magenta regions are the observa￾tions carried out to survey the supercluster, and the unla￾beled gray region is the original pointing from LoVoCCS. of ∼ 60 nearby clusters and have led to several addi￾tional projects. This includes a search for intracluster filaments (R. Shind… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A ∼ 16 deg2 field covering the densest complex of the Hercules Supercluster, composed of A2147, A2152, A2151, and two additional “clumps”. The central panel contains the stretched, inverted, stacked DECam observations (4) with contours from the ROSAT All-Sky Survey overlaid (W. Voges 1993). Individual RGB cutouts showcase the irg sky-corrected stacks. with the ROSAT High Resolution Imager (Z. Huang & C. L.… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A diagram of the multi-plane geometry; each plane is labeled by their redshift. The observed position of an object is θ1, while the un-deflected position is β = θN+1 and can be recovered by using Equation 14. In principle, there are an arbitrary number of deflectors prior to plane j and following plane j − 2. these deflectors are thin relative to their separations33 , the multi-plane lens equation must be … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The shear-field for a source at z = 1 due to a “double cluster” with two deflectors of equal mass (M200 = 5 × 1014M⊙) that are placed at different redshifts: z = 0.13 at (−0.1, −0.1) and z = 0.04 at (0.1, 0.1). 3. Compute the convergence by taking the trace of Equation 7, and the shear by computing the trace￾less component of Aij . 4. Compute the reduced shear. In practice, when this is applied to a catalo… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A stretched, inverted image of the skyframe for r-band. The “ghost pupil”—an image of DECam and its supporting struts—is clearly visible. 2022). To support future low surface brightness (LSB) science with LoVoCCS observations (Escalante et al., in￾prep, A. M. Englert et al. 2025) the Gen3 pipeline now uses skycorr to produce sky-corrected coadds in addi￾tion to the default deepCoadd’s used for lensing-scie… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: A stretched irg cutout showing the Gen2 (left) and sky-corrected Gen3 (right) coadds. 4.3. Post-LSP Steps export data: The coadds, sky-corrected coadds, and object catalogs are exported from the repository for ease of access. Crucially, this step exports CModel and PSF photometry (K. Abazajian et al. 2004) along with adap￾tive second moments of sources and the PSF (C. Hirata & U. Seljak 2003; R. Mandelbaum… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: A single patch, before (left) and after (right) using the ShearCoaddTask to generate the noshear realiza￾tion of the coadd. masks are used to cover bright stars and the edges of a patch to prevent the formation of high-frequency ar￾tifacts. Lastly, a noise image whose covariance matches the underlying noise in the coadd is also needed to mit￾igate the creation of spurious noise sources. This is re￾peated … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: A sketch of the complete Gen3 pipeline. The data is primarily reduced on OSCAR, Brown University’s high performance computing cluster. Transparent boxes are folders saved on OSCAR, orange colored boxes are processing steps that rely on the LSP, blue boxes are post-LSP steps, and planned data products are enclosed in elliptical boxes. The brightest stars also have prominent bleed rows, depending on the bri… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: An irg cutout south of A2151 with the star+galaxy mask overlaid in blue. W =    0 G ≥ 12 30 10 ≤ G < 12 60 8 ≤ G < 10 70 7 ≤ G < 8 100 G < 7 (45) The diffraction spikes of stars brighter than G < 12 were masked with rectangles of dimensions 4RLV × 12 px2 , which were tilted by 45◦ and centered on the star. The deblender’s updated settings ensure that large foreground galaxies will be de… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: A comparison of the spectroscopic and photo￾metric redshifts, colored by their i-band magnitude. The solid line is ∆z 1+zs = 0; the dashed and dotted lines are ∆z 1+zs = 0.05 and ∆z 1+zs = 0.15 respectively. the set of templates and choice of priors; it is for these reasons that BPZ was chosen for estimating photometric redshifts. Through DESI DR1 ( DESI Collaboration et al. 2025), a total of 10, 988 gala… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: From top to bottom: plots showing the scatter, bias, and outlier rates in our photometric redshifts as a func￾tion of their spectroscopic redshift. Generally, we see larger statistics at higher redshifts where most of the emission has been redshifted out of ugri and into z. science using the total sample of ∼ 100 clusters will be shape-noise limited down to the ∼ 3% level. This im￾plies that the final sci… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: A set of null tests applied to both the metadetect (left) and HSM (right) shape catalogs. From top-to-bottom, these check that the mean shear as a function of S, res, and r-band magnitude is consistent with zero [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Correlation between the shapes of PSF stars and galaxies; horizontal lines show the root-mean-square shear due to lensing over by a circle of radius r200 for halos of various masses assuming a lens at z = 0.05 and a source at z = 1. 5.5. Shear Null Tests A series of null tests is carried out to assess which of the two shape catalogs, HSM and metadetect, of￾fer better control of systematics. First, on aver… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Residuals in the size of the PSF and its ellipticity as a function of instrumental magnitude. Percent-level biases in δT are still present, indicating that the BFE has only been partially corrected. these objects have their signal enhanced by the added noise, while the majority become detectable due to the re-convolution step which uses a slightly larger PSF than the original observations. The statistical… view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: An example cutout which was drawn for each source detected in the mass-map which includes the weak-lensing mass (M200), the source redshift (z), the peak signal to noise (S), and the statistical confidence of the detec￾tion (σ). The boundaries of the cutout were assigned based on the bounding-box of a given footprint, and the location of the peak signal was marked. weak signal in the mass map. The “MOBG” … view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Left: Significance contours of the mass map covering A2147; we detect several complexes, including two primary peaks detected in A2147S and a collection of five peaks associated with A2147N. Three of those are associated with background clusters, while two of them are assumed to be in the supercluster itself. Right: The background z ∼ 0.1 complex; though its mass is similar to A2147, the higher redshift r… view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Left: A cutout of A2151 showing the footprint which covers A2151C. Right: A cutout showing the mass map drawn over Clump A. There are multiple peaks detected, implying that the system is in an early state where multiple groups are merging. The markers are the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_23.png] view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Top: A cutout showing the mass map drawn over A2152. The peak lensing signal is noticeably ellipti￾cal, similar to the toy-model of a double cluster in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_24.png] view at source ↗
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: Postage-stamps of individual sources; irg cutouts of lensing sources detected in the complete CLFZ catalog with the mass maps overlaid. The coordinates, masses, and redshifts of this figure is available as the Data behind the Figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_26.png] view at source ↗
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Postage-stamps of individual sources (II) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_27.png] view at source ↗
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: Postage-stamps of individual sources (III) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_28.png] view at source ↗
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: Postage-stamps of individual sources (IV) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_29.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

289 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    and Poggianti, B

    Valentinuzzi, T. and Poggianti, B. M. and Fasano, G. and D’Onofrio, M. and Moretti, A. and Ramella, M. and Biviano, A. and Fritz, J. and Varela, J. and Bettoni, D. and Vulcani, B. and Moles, M. and Couch, W. J. and Dressler, A. and Kjærgaard, P. and Omizzolo, A. and Cava, A. , month = dec, year =. The red-sequence of 72. Astronomy & Astrophysics , publish...

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117522

  2. [2]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2000 , note =. doi:10.1086/309323 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/309323 2000

  3. [3]

    and Vílchez, J

    Petropoulou, V. and Vílchez, J. and Iglesias-Páramo, J. , month = apr, year =. Environmental. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/133 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/749/2/133

  4. [4]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics Review , author =

    Ram pressure stripping in high-density environments , volume =. Astronomy and Astrophysics Review , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3 , abstract =

    doi:10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3 2022

  5. [5]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2010 , note =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/709/2/1203 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/709/2/1203 2010

  6. [6]

    and Ferré-Mateu, Anna and Forbes, Duncan A

    Gannon, Jonah S. and Ferré-Mateu, Anna and Forbes, Duncan A. , month = feb, year =. The. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2602.21875 , abstract =

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.21875

  7. [7]

    and Abraham, Roberto and Merritt, Allison and Zhang, Jielai and Geha, Marla and Conroy, Charlie , month = jan, year =

    van Dokkum, Pieter G. and Abraham, Roberto and Merritt, Allison and Zhang, Jielai and Geha, Marla and Conroy, Charlie , month = jan, year =. The Astrophysical Journal Letters , publisher =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/798/2/L45 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/798/2/l45 2041

  8. [8]

    The Astrophysical Journal Letters , publisher =

    Koda, Jin and Yagi, Masafumi and Yamanoi, Hitomi and Komiyama, Yutaka , month = jun, year =. The Astrophysical Journal Letters , publisher =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/807/1/L2 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/807/1/l2 2041

  9. [9]

    Christopher and Durrell, Patrick R

    Mihos, J. Christopher and Durrell, Patrick R. and Ferrarese, Laura and Feldmeier, John J. and Côté, Patrick and Peng, Eric W. and Harding, Paul and Liu, Chengze and Gwyn, Stephen and Cuillandre, Jean-Charles , month = aug, year =. The Astrophysical Journal Letters , publisher =. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/809/2/L21 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/2041-8205/809/2/l21 2041

  10. [10]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Dwarf galaxies and cluster environments , volume =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =. 2018 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2307 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2307 2018

  11. [11]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =

    Dwarf galaxy luminosity functions and cluster environments , volume =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac209 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac209 2022

  12. [12]

    2006 , note =

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2006 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20052954 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20052954 2006

  13. [13]

    and Aguerri, J

    Sánchez-Janssen, R. and Aguerri, J. Alfonso L. and Muñoz-Tuñón, C. , month = jun, year =. Properties of the. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/589617 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/589617

  14. [14]

    and Drinkwater, M

    Phillipps, S. and Drinkwater, M. J. and Gregg, M. D. and Jones, J. B. , month = oct, year =. Ultracompact. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/322517 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/322517

  15. [15]

    The formation of ultracompact dwarf galaxies , volume =

    Fellhauer, Michael and Kroupa, Pavel , month = mar, year =. The formation of ultracompact dwarf galaxies , volume =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05087.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2002

  16. [16]

    Trevor and Patton, David R

    Simard, Luc and Mendel, J. Trevor and Patton, David R. and Ellison, Sara L. and McConnachie, Alan W. , month = sep, year =. A. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/11 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/11

  17. [17]

    and Romanowsky, Aaron J

    Brodie, Jean P. and Romanowsky, Aaron J. and Strader, Jay and Forbes, Duncan A. , month = dec, year =. The. The Astronomical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-6256/142/6/199 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/142/6/199

  18. [18]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    On the. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 2010 , note =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/721/2/1262 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/721/2/1262 2010

  19. [19]

    McDonald, Michael and Veilleux, Sylvain and Rupke, David S. N. and Mushotzky, Richard and Reynolds, Christopher , month = jun, year =. Star. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/734/2/95 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/734/2/95

  20. [20]

    and Corwin, Jr., Harold G

    Abell, George O. and Corwin, Jr., Harold G. and Olowin, Ronald P. , month = may, year =. A. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , publisher =. doi:10.1086/191333 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/191333

  21. [21]

    , month = dec, year =

    Voges, W. , month = dec, year =. The. Advances in Space Research , publisher =. doi:10.1016/0273-1177(93)90147-4 , abstract =

    doi:10.1016/0273-1177(93)90147-4

  22. [22]

    and Sifón, C

    Hilton, M. and Sifón, C. and Naess, S. and Madhavacheril, M. and Oguri, M. and Rozo, E. and Rykoff, E. and Abbott, T. M. C. and Adhikari, S. and Aguena, M. and Aiola, S. and Allam, S. and Amodeo, S. and Amon, A. and Annis, J. and Ansarinejad, B. and Aros-Bunster, C. and Austermann, J. E. and Avila, S. and Bacon, D. and Battaglia, N. and Beall, J. A. and B...

  23. [23]

    Vakili, Mohammadjavad and Hoekstra, Henk and Bilicki, Maciej and Fortuna, Maria Cristina and Kuijken, Konrad and Wright, Angus H. and Asgari, Marika and Brown, Michael and Dombrovskij, Elisabeth and Erben, Thomas and Giblin, Benjamin and Heymans, Catherine and Hildebrandt, Hendrik and Johnston, Harry and Joudaki, Shahab and Kannawadi, Arun , month = jul, ...

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/20

  24. [24]

    Oguri, Masamune and Lin, Yen-Ting and Lin, Sheng-Chieh and Nishizawa, Atsushi J. and More, Anupreeta and More, Surhud and Hsieh, Bau-Ching and Medezinski, Elinor and Miyatake, Hironao and Jian, Hung-Yu and Lin, Lihwai and Takada, Masahiro and Okabe, Nobuhiro and Speagle, Joshua S. and Coupon, Jean and Leauthaud, Alexie and Lupton, Robert H. and Miyazaki, ...

  25. [25]

    A cluster finding algorithm based on the multiband identification of red sequence galaxies , volume =

    Oguri, Masamune , month = oct, year =. A cluster finding algorithm based on the multiband identification of red sequence galaxies , volume =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1446 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1446

  26. [26]

    Wen, Z. L. and Han, J. L. and Liu, F. S. , month = aug, year =. Galaxy. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/183/2/197 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/183/2/197

  27. [27]

    Wen, Z. L. and Han, J. L. , month = jun, year =. A. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad409d , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad409d

  28. [28]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan , author =

    Hundreds of weak lensing shear-selected clusters from the. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan , author =. 2021 , pages =. doi:10.1093/pasj/psab047 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psab047 2021

  29. [29]

    Completeness in

    White, Martin and van Waerbeke, Ludovic and Mackey, Jonathan , month = aug, year =. Completeness in. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/341351 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/341351

  30. [30]

    and Rubiño-Martín, J

    Aguado-Barahona, A. and Rubiño-Martín, J. A. and Ferragamo, A. and Barrena, R. and Streblyanska, A. and Tramonte, D. , month = mar, year =. Velocity dispersion and dynamical masses for 388 galaxy clusters and groups -. Astronomy & Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039980 , abstract =

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039980

  31. [31]

    and Krughoff, K

    Colberg, Jörg M. and Krughoff, K. Simon and Connolly, Andrew J. , month = may, year =. Intercluster filaments in a Λ. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.08897.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2005

  32. [32]

    Universe , author =

    Galaxy. Universe , author =. 2025 , note =. doi:10.3390/universe11060167 , abstract =

    doi:10.3390/universe11060167 2025

  33. [33]

    Harvard College Observatory Bulletin , author =

    Note on a. Harvard College Observatory Bulletin , author =. 1930 , note =

    1930

  34. [34]

    Nature , author =

    The. Nature , author =. 2014 , note =. doi:10.1038/nature13674 , abstract =

    doi:10.1038/nature13674 2014

  35. [35]

    and Yee, H

    Gladders, Michael D. and Yee, H. K. C. , month = mar, year =. The. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , publisher =. doi:10.1086/427327 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/427327

  36. [36]

    and Gladders, M

    Gilbank, David G. and Gladders, M. D. and Yee, H. K. C. and Hsieh, B. C. , month = mar, year =. The. The Astronomical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/3/94 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/3/94

  37. [38]

    and Graham, Melissa L

    Sand, David J. and Graham, Melissa L. and Bildfell, Chris and Foley, Ryan J. and Pritchet, Chris and Zaritsky, Dennis and Hoekstra, Henk and Just, Dennis W. and Herbert-Fort, Stéphane and Sivanandam, Suresh , month = feb, year =. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/729/2/142 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/729/2/142

  38. [39]

    and Edge, A

    Ebeling, H. and Edge, A. C. and Allen, S. W. and Crawford, C. S. and Fabian, A. C. and Huchra, J. P. , month = oct, year =. The. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03549.x , abstract =

    arXiv 2000

  39. [40]

    Rubin Observatory Science Pipelines Developers

    Vera C. Rubin Observatory Science Pipelines Developers. The LSST Science Pipelines Software: Optical Survey Pipeline Reduction and Analysis Environment. 2025. doi:10.71929/rubin/2570545

    arXiv 2025

  40. [41]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.0912.0201 , abstract =

    2009 , note =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.0912.0201 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.0912.0201 2009

  41. [42]

    Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV , year = 2012, editor =

    Hyper Suprime-Cam. Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy IV , year = 2012, editor =. doi:10.1117/12.926844 , adsurl =

    doi:10.1117/12.926844 2012

  42. [43]

    Merger-induced disturbance and temporal signatures in galaxy clusters:

    Kong, Chuiyang and Dell'Antonio, Ian , month = feb, year =. Merger-induced disturbance and temporal signatures in galaxy clusters:. Astronomy and Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557401 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557401

  43. [44]

    Shinde, Rahul and Dell'Antonio, Ian , month = oct, year =. Weak-. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2510.26318 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.26318

  44. [45]

    Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences , author =

    Measurement and calibration of non-linear shear terms in galaxy cluster fields , volume =. Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.3389/fspas.2024.1411810 , abstract =

    arXiv 2024

  45. [46]

    Measurement of the

    Huang, Pei-Jun and Dell'Antonio, Ian and LaDuca, Philip and Escalante, Zacharias and Englert, Anthony , month = dec, year =. Measurement of the. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2512.12027 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.12027

  46. [47]

    Benton and Giocoli, Carlo , month = dec, year =

    Petkova, Margarita and Metcalf, R. Benton and Giocoli, Carlo , month = dec, year =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1860 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1860

  47. [48]

    and Becker, Matthew R

    Sheldon, Erin S. and Becker, Matthew R. and MacCrann, Niall and Jarvis, Michael , month = oct, year =. Mitigating. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb595 , abstract =

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb595

  48. [49]

    and Becker, M

    Yamamoto, M. and Becker, M. R. and Sheldon, E. and Jarvis, M. and Gruendl, R. A. and Menanteau, F. and Rykoff, E. S. and Mau, S. and Schutt, T. and Gatti, M. and Troxel, M. A. and Amon, A. and Anbajagane, D. and Bernstein, G. M. and Gruen, D. and Huff, E. M. and Tabbutt, M. and Tong, A. and Yanny, B. and Abbott, T. M. C. and Aguena, M. and Alarcon, A. and...

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.05665

  49. [50]

    Detection of (dark) matter concentrations via weak gravitational lensing , volume =

    Schneider, Peter , month = dec, year =. Detection of (dark) matter concentrations via weak gravitational lensing , volume =. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/283.3.837 , abstract =

    doi:10.1093/mnras/283.3.837

  50. [51]

    Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    Searching dark-matter halos in the. Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2007 , note =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065323 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065323 2007

  51. [52]

    and Erben, T

    Schirmer, M. and Erben, T. and Hetterscheidt, M. and Schneider, P. , month = feb, year =. Astronomy and Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065955 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065955

  52. [53]

    , month = apr, year =

    Howell, Steve B. , month = apr, year =. Handbook of

  53. [54]

    and Astier, P

    Antilogus, P. and Astier, P. and Doherty, P. and Guyonnet, A. and Regnault, N. , month = mar, year =. The brighter-fatter effect and pixel correlations in. Journal of Instrumentation , publisher =. doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/03/C03048 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/03/c03048

  54. [55]

    and Moolekamp, F

    Melchior, P. and Moolekamp, F. and Jerdee, M. and Armstrong, R. and Sun, A.-L. and Bosch, J. and Lupton, R. , month = jul, year =. Astronomy and Computing , publisher =. doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2018.07.001 , abstract =

    doi:10.1016/j.ascom.2018.07.001 2018

  55. [56]

    Astrophysics Source Code Library , author =

    Piff:. Astrophysics Source Code Library , author =. 2021 , note =

    2021

  56. [57]

    Danieli, Shany and Kado-Fong, Erin and Huang, Song and Luo, Yifei and Li, Ting S and Kelvin, Lee S and Leauthaud, Alexie and Greene, Jenny E. and Mintz, Abby and Lin, Xiaojing and Li, Jiaxuan and Baldassare, Vivienne and Banerjee, Arka and Bhattacharyya, Joy and Blanco, Diana and Brooks, Alyson and Cai, Zheng and Chen, Xinjun and Cruz, Akaxia and Geda, Ro...

  57. [58]

    Correction of the brighter-fatter effect on the

    Astier, Pierre and Regnault, Nicolas , month = feb, year =. Correction of the brighter-fatter effect on the. Astronomy & Astrophysics , publisher =. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245407 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245407

  58. [59]

    Chambers, K. C. and Magnier, E. A. and Metcalfe, N. and Flewelling, H. A. and Huber, M. E. and Waters, C. Z. and Denneau, L. and Draper, P. W. and Farrow, D. and Finkbeiner, D. P. and Holmberg, C. and Koppenhoefer, J. and Price, P. A. and Rest, A. and Saglia, R. P. and Schlafly, E. F. and Smartt, S. J. and Sweeney, W. and Wainscoat, R. J. and Burgett, W. ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1612.05560

  59. [60]

    2024 , note =

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia , author =. 2024 , note =. doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.53 , abstract =

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2024.53 2024

  60. [61]

    and Agüeros, Marcel A

    Adelman-McCarthy, Jennifer K. and Agüeros, Marcel A. and Allam, Sahar S. and Allende Prieto, Carlos and Anderson, Kurt S. J. and Anderson, Scott F. and Annis, James and Bahcall, Neta A. and Bailer-Jones, C. A. L. and Baldry, Ivan K. and Barentine, J. C. and Bassett, Bruce A. and Becker, Andrew C. and Beers, Timothy C. and Bell, Eric F. and Berlind, Andrea...

  61. [62]

    Abbott, T. M. C. and Abdalla, F. B. and Allam, S. and Amara, A. and Annis, J. and Asorey, J. and Avila, S. and Ballester, O. and Banerji, M. and Barkhouse, W. and Baruah, L. and Baumer, M. and Bechtol, K. and Becker, M. R. and Benoit-Lévy, A. and Bernstein, G. M. and Bertin, E. and Blazek, J. and Bocquet, S. and Brooks, D. and Brout, D. and Buckley-Geer, ...

    2018

  62. [63]

    Waters, C. Z. and Magnier, E. A. and Price, P. A. and Chambers, K. C. and Burgett, W. S. and Draper, P. W. and Flewelling, H. A. and Hodapp, K. W. and Huber, M. E. and Jedicke, R. and Kaiser, N. and Kudritzki, R.-P. and Lupton, R. H. and Metcalfe, N. and Rest, A. and Sweeney, W. E. and Tonry, J. L. and Wainscoat, R. J. and Wood-Vasey, W. M. , month = oct,...

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/abb82b

  63. [64]

    NASA IPAC DataSet , author =

    Galactic. NASA IPAC DataSet , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.26131/IRSA537 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.26131/irsa537 2022

  64. [65]

    and Mei, S

    Raichoor, A. and Mei, S. and Erben, T. and Hildebrandt, H. and Huertas-Company, M. and Ilbert, O. and Licitra, R. and Ball, N. M. and Boissier, S. and Boselli, A. and Chen, Y.-T. and Côté, P. and Cuillandre, J.-C. and Duc, P. A. and Durrell, P. R. and Ferrarese, L. and Guhathakurta, P. and Gwyn, S. D. J. and Kavelaars, J. J. and Lançon, A. and Liu, C. and...

  65. [66]

    and Frenk, Carlos S

    Navarro, Julio F. and Frenk, Carlos S. and White, Simon D. M. , month = dec, year =. A. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/304888 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/304888

  66. [67]

    and Sevilla-Noarbe, I

    Bechtol, K. and Sevilla-Noarbe, I. and Drlica-Wagner, A. and Yanny, B. and Gruendl, R. A. and Sheldon, E. and Rykoff, E. S. and De Vicente, J. and Adamow, M. and Anbajagane, D. and Becker, M. R. and Bernstein, G. M. and Carnero Rosell, A. and Gschwend, J. and Gorsuch, M. and Hartley, W. G. and Jarvis, M. and Jeltema, T. and Kron, R. and Manning, T. A. and...

    2026

  67. [68]

    Magnier, Eugene. A. and Schlafly, Edward. F. and Finkbeiner, Douglas P. and Tonry, J. L. and Goldman, B. and Röser, S. and Schilbach, E. and Casertano, S. and Chambers, K. C. and Flewelling, H. A. and Huber, M. E. and Price, P. A. and Sweeney, W. E. and Waters, C. Z. and Denneau, L. and Draper, P. W. and Hodapp, K. W. and Jedicke, R. and Kaiser, N. and Ku...

  68. [69]

    The Open Journal of Astrophysics , author =

    Redshift. The Open Journal of Astrophysics , author =. 2026 , note =. doi:10.33232/001c.158200 , abstract =

    doi:10.33232/001c.158200 2026

  69. [70]

    2025 , note =

    Data. 2025 , note =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2503.14745 , abstract =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.14745 2025

  70. [71]

    Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =

    Photometric. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics , author =. 2022 , note =. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032122-014611 , abstract =

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-032122-014611 2022

  71. [72]

    and Shirasaki, Masato and Sifón, Cristóbal and Huang, Song and Nishizawa, Atsushi J

    Mandelbaum, Rachel and Miyatake, Hironao and Hamana, Takashi and Oguri, Masamune and Simet, Melanie and Armstrong, Robert and Bosch, James and Murata, Ryoma and Lanusse, François and Leauthaud, Alexie and Coupon, Jean and More, Surhud and Takada, Masahiro and Miyazaki, Satoshi and Speagle, Joshua S. and Shirasaki, Masato and Sifón, Cristóbal and Huang, So...

  72. [73]

    and Okabe, Nobuhiro and Tanaka, Masayuki , month = jan, year =

    Oguri, Masamune and Miyazaki, Satoshi and Hikage, Chiaki and Mandelbaum, Rachel and Utsumi, Yousuke and Miyatake, Hironao and Takada, Masahiro and Armstrong, Robert and Bosch, James and Komiyama, Yutaka and Leauthaud, Alexie and More, Surhud and Nishizawa, Atsushi J. and Okabe, Nobuhiro and Tanaka, Masayuki , month = jan, year =. Two- and three-dimensiona...

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psx070

  73. [74]

    and Plazas Malagon, Andres A

    Li, Xiangchong and Miyatake, Hironao and Luo, Wentao and More, Surhud and Oguri, Masamune and Hamana, Takashi and Mandelbaum, Rachel and Shirasaki, Masato and Takada, Masahiro and Armstrong, Robert and Kannawadi, Arun and Takita, Satoshi and Miyazaki, Satoshi and Nishizawa, Atsushi J. and Plazas Malagon, Andres A. and Strauss, Michael A. and Tanaka, Masay...

  74. [75]

    On some structural features of the metagalaxy (

    Shapley, Harlow , month = jun, year =. On some structural features of the metagalaxy (. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnras/94.9.791 , urldate =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/94.9.791

  75. [76]

    and Tifft, W

    Tarenghi, M. and Tifft, W. G. and Chincarini, G. and Rood, H. J. and Thompson, L. A. , month = dec, year =. The. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1086/157558 , abstract =

    doi:10.1086/157558

  76. [77]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    The. The Astrophysical Journal , author =. 1980 , pages =. doi:10.1086/157675 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1086/157675 1980

  77. [78]

    and Aguerri, J

    Agulli, I. and Aguerri, J. A. L. and Dominguez Palmero, L. and Diaferio, A. , month = sep, year =. The built-up of the red sequence in the. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , publisher =. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw092 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw092

  78. [79]

    and Okura, Y

    Okabe, N. and Okura, Y. and Futamase, T. , month = apr, year =. Weak-lensing. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/713/1/291 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/713/1/291

  79. [80]

    , month = sep, year =

    Umetsu, Keiichi and Pizzardo, Michele and Diaferio, Antonaldo and Geller, Margaret J. , month = sep, year =. Cluster. The Astrophysical Journal , publisher =. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aded91 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aded91

  80. [81]

    and Battaglia, Nick and Beall, James A

    Naess, Sigurd and Aiola, Simone and Austermann, Jason E. and Battaglia, Nick and Beall, James A. and Becker, Daniel T. and Bond, Richard J. and Calabrese, Erminia and Choi, Steve K. and Cothard, Nicholas F. and Crowley, Kevin T. and Darwish, Omar and Datta, Rahul and Denison, Edward V. and Devlin, Mark and Duell, Cody J. and Duff, Shannon M. and Duivenvoo...

    2020

Showing first 80 references.