The Stellar Velocity Anisotropy of Strong Lensing Massive Elliptical Galaxies and Its Role in the Inference of the Hubble Parameter <i>H</i> <sub>0</sub> Using Spatially Resolved Kinematics

Abstract One of the biggest challenges in cosmology, the Hubble tension, requires independent measurements of H 0 , and strong lensing with time-delay cosmography is a promising avenue. The inclusion of spatially resolved kinematic data helps break the mass–sheet degeneracy, a key limitation in strong lensing. Kinematics, however, suffers from its own degeneracy due to unknown stellar velocity anisotropy, which can bias galaxy mass profile inferences. We investigate the bias in H 0 using a sample of 10 massive elliptical galaxies at z = 0.2 from the Illustris TNG100 simulations. We generate mock line-of-sight velocity-dispersion maps resembling JWST NIRSpec observations and test four anisotropy models: Osipkov–Merritt (OM), Mamon–Łokas (ML), constant β , and a generalized–OM (gOM) profile, under both kinematics-only and joint kinematics plus strong lensing analyses. We find a subpercent average bias in H 0 across 10 galaxies with joint modeling for three models: +0.2% ± 1.6% (ML), −0.9% ± 1.9% (constant) and −0.9% ± 1.6% (gOM), with ∼5% scatter. Joint modeling reduces bias, improves precision, and mitigates outlier results. Overall, the gOM model best recovers galaxy parameters and delivers the most accurate H 0 relative to posterior uncertainties considering both analyses. However, the single-parameter OM model produces large systematic biases: with kinematics-only data, H 0 errors can exceed 20%, and even with joint modeling, it produces an overall bias of +11.5% ± 1.3% (OM). The higher bias in OM is thus unlikely to average out across an ensemble of galaxies. Our findings highlight the impact of anisotropy assumptions on H 0 inference, and more broadly, in galaxy dynamics.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2026-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ae4722
Primary Topic
Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Stellar Velocity Anisotropy of Strong Lensing Massive Elliptical Galaxies and Its Role in the Inference of the Hubble Parameter H 0 Using Spatially Resolved Kinematics

Quinn E. Minor, Vishal Verma
The Astrophysical Journal
Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
article

The Stellar Velocity Anisotropy of Strong Lensing Massive Elliptical Galaxies and Its Role in the Inference of the Hubble Parameter H 0 Using Spatially Resolved Kinematics

Quinn E. Minor, Vishal Verma
article en

Abstract

Abstract One of the biggest challenges in cosmology, the Hubble tension, requires independent measurements of H 0 , and strong lensing with time-delay cosmography is a promising avenue. The inclusion of spatially resolved kinematic data helps break the mass–sheet degeneracy, a key limitation in strong lensing. Kinematics, however, suffers from its own degeneracy due to unknown stellar velocity anisotropy, which can bias galaxy mass profile inferences. We investigate the bias in H 0 using a sample of 10 massive elliptical galaxies at z = 0.2 from the Illustris TNG100 simulations. We generate mock line-of-sight velocity-dispersion maps resembling JWST NIRSpec observations and test four anisotropy models: Osipkov–Merritt (OM), Mamon–Łokas (ML), constant β , and a generalized–OM (gOM) profile, under both kinematics-only and joint kinematics plus strong lensing analyses. We find a subpercent average bias in H 0 across 10 galaxies with joint modeling for three models: +0.2% ± 1.6% (ML), −0.9% ± 1.9% (constant) and −0.9% ± 1.6% (gOM), with ∼5% scatter. Joint modeling reduces bias, improves precision, and mitigates outlier results. Overall, the gOM model best recovers galaxy parameters and delivers the most accurate H 0 relative to posterior uncertainties considering both analyses. However, the single-parameter OM model produces large systematic biases: with kinematics-only data, H 0 errors can exceed 20%, and even with joint modeling, it produces an overall bias of +11.5% ± 1.3% (OM). The higher bias in OM is thus unlikely to average out across an ensemble of galaxies. Our findings highlight the impact of anisotropy assumptions on H 0 inference, and more broadly, in galaxy dynamics.

The Astrophysical JournalVol. 1000(2)
The Graduate Center, CUNY (US), American Museum of Natural History (US), Borough of Manhattan Community College (US), Lehman College (US), City University of New York (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.