# The Top Ten List of Gravitational Lens Candidates from the HST Medium Deep Survey

## 1 Introduction

The HST Medium Deep Survey (MDS) (Griffiths et al. 1994a ; Griffiths et al. 1994b ; Ratnatunga et. al. (1999)), has comprised parallel WFPC2 observations of just over 400 random fields for the systematic study of the evolution of faint galaxies, as well as being a serendipitous survey which has resulted in the discovery of many interesting objects. The survey has provided a unique set of data for over 150,000 galaxies wherein the selection of a correspondingly large number of field galaxies has been possible down to I$`<`$25 (Griffiths et al. (1996)). The discovery of two quadruple-type lenses from the HST MDS, viz. HST 12531$``$2914 and HST 14176$`+`$5226 has previously been reported (Ratnatunga et al. (1995)) and subsequent spectroscopic observations of HST 14176$`+`$5226 have provided confirmation that the system is indeed a gravitational lens (Crampton et al. (1996); Moustakas and Davis (1998)).

Observations and modeling of lens systems can be used to constrain directly the distribution of dark matter in the lensing galaxies. The characteristic separation $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ of lensed images depends on the total lensing mass and the distances between the observer, the lens, and the source object. This allows the mass-to-light ratio of the lens galaxy to be determined directly if the lens and source redshifts are known. The shape of the lensing mass distribution can also be constrained, using the configuration and light distribution of the lensed images.

Gravitational lenses can also be used to provide constraints on the geometry of the universe. The image separations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ depend on the angular size distances to the lens and background source, which in turn depend on global cosmology. In order to measure the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, for instance, it has been suggested that strong gravitational lenses might be used, i.e. isolated galaxies or clusters of galaxies for which the gravitational potential results in multiple imaging of a background source object (Paczynski and Gorski (1981); Alock and Anderson (1986); Gott, Park, and Lee (1989)). The use of the lens number counts (or the optical depth) has also been advocated since this is very sensitive to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (Fukugita et al. (1992)). Maoz and Rix (1993); Kochanek (1996) have applied this method, obtaining upper limits of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0.7`$. Predictions of lensing probabilities by galaxies are very sensitive to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. If $`\mathrm{\Lambda }1`$, for example, we would expect to see about 10 times more lensed systems than if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ (Maoz and Rix (1993); Kochanek (1993)).

Lensing constraints on cosmology are not entirely free from systematic errors, however. The biggest problem is the lack of information on the lens galaxies at $`z>0.4`$, which still allows significant error in the estimate of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Elliptical galaxies dominate the expected lensing rates, due to the large concentration of mass near their centers (e.g. Keeton and Kochanek (1997)), so any statistical bias needs be determined by comparing the non-lensing elliptical galaxies at comparable redshifts.

At the faint magnitudes $`V>20`$ surveyed by the HST MDS we might expect to discover a few gravitational lenses in each square degree of sky. Unfortunately the total area of sky surveyed by the WFPC2 is still under about 1 square degree, and most of the lens candidates discovered are too small and faint for ground based spectroscopic follow-up with even the largest telescopes. The sample we are locating today probably needs the next generation of space based instrumentation for more detailed studies.

## 2 Gravitational Lenses in the Medium Deep Survey

Miralda-Escudé and Lehár (1992) have pointed out that, for the same lens galaxy population that is responsible for the known lensed radio sources, there should be $`100`$ lensed faint galaxies per square degree. With small image separations ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta 1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$) and faint background sources, these lensed systems cannot be detected from the ground. However, they should be readily detectable using HST observations, and could represent the largest untapped mine of lensed systems. A large statistical sample would greatly increase the importance of lensing for studies of galaxy evolution and cosmology.

Among the sample of field galaxies in the MDS, we have discovered ten gravitational lens candidates. The discovery of two lenses HST 12531$``$2914 and HST 14176$`+`$5226 (Figures 1-2) has been reported already (Ratnatunga et al. (1995)) and the spectroscopic observation of HST 14176$`+`$5226 has provided confirmation that the system is a gravitational lens (Crampton et al. (1996); Moustakas and Davis (1998)). The other eight lens candidates were discovered subsequently, and their HST images are shown in Figures 3-10, in the light of filters F814W (I), F606W (V) and, when available, F450W (B). Each image extracted from an HST WFPC2 observation is $`6\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}4`$ on each side. Typically, the lensed (source) images are blue arcs, while the lensing galaxy appears to be a red elliptical galaxy, thus making them very good candidates for gravitational lensing.

## 3 Simple models of the Gravitational Lens systems

A two-dimensional image fitting procedure was developed to model the first two HST lenses, as described in Ratnatunga et al. (1995). This simple modeling approach used singular isothermal ellipsoid potentials (Kormann, Schneider and Bartelmann (1994)), and this same approach was applied to each of the gravitational lenses to derive the best fitting model in each case. Our approach does not require careful astrometry or photometric measurement of the faint, under-sampled WFPC2 images. The model is derived by fitting the full 2D-image rather than a list of estimated positions and magnitudes. This approach, which is more CPU intensive, makes use of the full extended nature of the light distribution of lens and lensed images and also uses the observational errors associated with each image pixel. The choice of the number of parameters fitted was done interactively so as to obtain a good convergence while not exceeding the number of significant parameters.

In a few cases the system was observed in several filters and the lensed images in through some filters were too faint or not sufficiently well resolved from the brighter lens galaxies. For these cases it was not possible to fit all the parameters and for the adopted model we took the geometric parameters and the description of the potential from the filter in which the system was observed best.

The centroid of the gravitational potential of the lens was assumed to be the same as that of the light of the lensing galaxy. The axis ratio and orientation of the mass (potential) were left as free parameters in the model. If the lensed object is extended with a half-light radius larger than a pixel, then the axis ratio and orientation of the lensed galaxy were left as free parameters. The image profiles of the lens and the lensed objects were selected to be Disk-like or Bulge-like. If the lensed object was point-like within the WFPC2 resolution then a Gaussian profile was adopted. In a few cases the lens was better fitted by a disk-plus-bulge model as could be seen when the lens galaxy was analyzed alone through the regular MDS pipeline analysis software. However, to keep the modeling simple and limit the number of parameters fitted, the lens was modeled with a single component.

Images of the candidate lenses in each filter are illustrated for F814W (I), F606W (V) and when available F450W (B), from the top down. On each horizontal strip of five objects, we have from left to right 1) the region selected for analysis, 2) the model of the WFPC2 observation, 3) the model without convolution by the HST PSF, 4) the residual image after subtraction of the model image from the observed image and 5) the model without the lensing galaxy. The corresponding tables give the fitted parameters, with errors for each model. More details and FITS files of the observations and fitted models are available from the MDS website http://archive.stsci.edu/mds/.

## 4 Discussion of each lens system

HST 14176+5226 is the first MDS HST “Einstein Cross” lens candidate, found in the “Groth-Westphal strip” (GWS). This is the brightest lens system discovered with the HST and it has been confirmed spectroscopically. The elliptical lensing galaxy has a redshift of z=0.803 and a color index (V-I)=1.9 mag. The lensed source at redshift z=3.4 (Crampton et al. (1996); Moustakas and Davis (1998)) appears to be a QSO with an apparent color (V-I)=0.5 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$13 (angular distance between source and centroid of lens). The image magnification is about 2.4 magnitudes, making each component about 0.9 mag brighter than the source QSO. The modeled image gives a very good fit to the observed image, with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ of unity.

HST 12531-2914 is the second MDS HST “Einstein Cross” lens candidate. The elliptical lensing galaxy has an apparent color (V-I)=2.0 mag. The lensed source appears to be point-like with a color (V-I)=0.2 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$06. The image magnification is about 2.3 magnitudes, making each component about 0.8 mag brighter than the point-like source. The model gives a very good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ of unity.

HST 14164+5215 is a pair of images symmetrically place around a brighter galaxy in GWS. It is a difficult candidate to model since the differential image distortion so close to the WFPC2 pyramid edge is unknown and probably significant. It was ignored in the preliminary model presented here and may account for the poor fit if the candidate is confirmed spectroscopically. Since the lensing galaxy is a disk with a 20% bulge, a disk profile was adopted for the single component lens model. The bulge is apparent at the center in the residual image. The lens galaxy has an apparent color (V-I)=1.0 mag. The lensed source appears to be point-like with a color (V-I)=0.7 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$1. The image magnification is about 3.5 magnitudes, making each component about 2.7 mag brighter than the source. The model gives a very good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ just larger than unity (1.07).

HST 15433+5352 is very good strong lens candidate. The red elliptical lensing galaxy has an apparent color (V-I)=1.4 mag, and (B-V)=2.1 mag. The much bluer lensed source appears to be extended with a color (V-I)=0.4 mag and (B-V)=0.4 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$16. The image magnification is about 2.2 magnitudes. The model gives a reasonably good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ just larger than unity.

HST 01247+0352 is a good candidate for a strong lensed pair. The red spherical elliptical lensing galaxy (E0) has an apparent color (V-I)=2.1 mag. The bluer lensed source appears to be point-like with a color (V-I)=0.7 mag. Two much fainter images can be seen near the detection limit which might make this a Quad system. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$08. The image magnification is about 3.5 magnitudes, making each component about 2.8 mag brighter than the source. The model gives a reasonably good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ close to unity.

HST 01248+0351 is a good candidate for a strong lensed pair in the same WFPC2 field as HST 01247+0352. The edge-on disk lensing galaxy has a color (V-I)=1.2 mag. The bluer lensed source appears to be point-like with a color (V-I)=0.7 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$05. The image magnification is about 3.1 magnitudes, making each component about 2.4 mag brighter than the source. The model gives a good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ close to unity. Spectroscopy is required to confirm this candidate as a gravitational lens. It is included in this sample as the best candidate for lensing by a disk (Keeton and Kochanek (1998)).

HST 16302+8230 could be an “Einstein ring” but clearly needs spectroscopic confirmation, since it may also be a polar ring galaxy. In our opinion it is the least probable of our top ten candidate list but the most intriguing. It has been nicknamed the “the London Underground” since it resembles that logo. The right half of the the image is much fainter for an unknown reason. The “ring” is clearly much bluer than the central galaxy. The edge-on disk lensing galaxy is barely visible in the V band and was not detected in the B band which just shows a part of the ring. If it is a lensed source, then it appears to be extended with a color (V-I)=0.9 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$14. The image magnification is about 2.1 magnitudes. The model gives a reasonably good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ close to unity.

HST 16309+8230 is an arc in the same field as HST 16302+8230. The lensing elliptical galaxy has an apparent (V-I) color 1.4 mag and (B-V)=2.2 mag. The significantly distorted lensed source is an extended edge-on disk-like galaxy with color (V-I)=1.4 mag, and (B-V)=0.4 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5. The image magnification is about 0.9 magnitudes. The model gives a good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ close to unity.

HST 12368+6212 is an arc in the Hubble Deep Field (HDF). The lensing elliptical galaxy has an apparent (V-I) color of 1.0 mag and (B-V)=2.0 mag. The significantly distorted lensed source is extended with a color (V-I)=0.3 mag, and (B-V)=0.2 mag. The impact radius is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$4. The image magnification is about 1.7 magnitudes. The model gives a good fit with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ just larger than unity.

HST 18078+4600 is an arc caused by the gravitational potential of a small group of 4 galaxies. Since the software at hand, developed for Ratnatunga et al. (1995) assumed a single lensing galaxy, the outer two galaxy images were masked out in the image analysis which was used to derive the approximate lens model. The two central galaxies, with a color (V-I)=2.0 mag, were merged in the model and were not detected in the B band. The significantly distorted lensed extended source with colors (V-I)=0.3 mag, and (B-V)=0.2 mag. The image magnification is about 0.7 magnitudes. The model gives a good fit in V and B with a normalized $`\chi ^2`$ just larger than unity, but a poor fit in I owing to the use of a single lens galaxy approximation in the model.

## 5 Survey Area

The number of strong gravitational lenses as a function of redshift is very sensitive to the value of the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (Fukugita et al. (1992); Kochanek (1992)) and could be used as an estimator of the latter quantity if all of the complex detection thresholds which govern completeness are well understood and known quantitatively.

These ten gravitational lenses were discovered serendipitously on WFPC2 images processed via the data analysis pipeline of the HST Medium Deep Survey and were not found as a result of a very systematic or quantitative search. In view of the very large range of data quality amongst the pure parallel MDS observations and because of overlapping fields, it is not possible to be precise about the number of fields surveyed and we have deliberately rounded the numbers to reflect the nature of approximate estimates. In the full survey we processed over 500 WFPC2 fields, each covering about 4.77 square arcmin of sky. Overlap between WFPC2 fields is on average about 20% for the MDS survey. All of the Gravitational lenses were however discovered on about 130 WFPC2 fields which were designated “priority one” for which we had three or more exposures in each of two or more filters. Although only just over 10% of the “priority one” fields had exposures in the three BVI filters, 50% of the lenses discovered, have observations in all three filters. Since the pointings were random, this implies a very strong selection effect in terms of data quality. Clearly we found the “Top ten list” of lenses in the best data available to the Medium Deep Survey.

## 6 Incompleteness

Two factors distinguish these WFPC2 fields from the rest. More exposures usually indicated a longer total exposure time and maybe more importantly better cosmic ray rejection. Removal of cosmic rays in single exposures clearly runs the risk of losing the lensed images in the cleaning out of many cosmic rays, and this remains true for stacks with two images which require cleaning out of the non-negligible number of pixels hit by cosmic rays in both images. In Figure 11 we show the limiting magnitude for completeness of the object catalog as a function of total integration time, for all WFPC2 images processed through the MDS pipeline in the 3 main filters. The “priority one” MDS fields are plotted with circles, with filled circles showing those fields on which gravitational lenses were discovered.

It appears that a limiting magnitude fainter than 25.1 mag in F450W, 24.8 in F606W and 24.3 in F814W, requiring total exposure times typically longer than 1 hour, is needed for discovery of a gravitational lens. Assuming that limiting magnitude is the only factor, the survey of about 160 WFPC2 fields, less about 20% overlap, leads to an estimate of the total survey area of about 0.17 square degrees.

The actual process of discovery of the lenses included a manual component whereby the most likely candidates of gravitational lensing were picked out during an inspection stage of the MDS pipeline or from the residual images after removal of the maximum likelihood scale-free model for the galaxy. Typically the lensed object was much bluer than the lensing galaxy, and is seen better on the F450W or F606W filter rather than F814W which was by default the first filter used for parallel observations of limited total time on each field. The availability of an image in other filters was useful to ensure that the colors of the lensed images were about the same. So the fact that all the lenses discovered in the MDS are on “priority one” fields is probably not coincidental. If good images in two or more filters (MDS priority one) was the only factor, then the survey consisted of about 130 WFPC2 fields with an estimated area of about 0.14 square degrees. If we take both conditions i.e. limiting magnitude and MDS “priority one”, then we have about 90 fields or about 0.1 square degrees, which is a lower estimate.

An incomplete sample of gravitational lenses can, however, be used to measure $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ if we know or can average over unknown properties of the lensing galaxies such as the mass distribution (Im, Griffiths and Ratnatunga (1997)). The expected bias caused by the orientation of mass should be random and could be averaged out. However a selection effect that is caused by internal extinction within the lens galaxy may lead to a systematic bias that does not average out. When a statistically significant sample of spectroscopically confirmed candidates becomes available, the MDS database is an ideal place for the comparison of the properties of the lensing ellipticals and non-lensing ellipticals to see if lenses are found preferentially in low extinction systems.

We have presented a “Top Ten list” of the lens candidates. In most of these cases the lensed images are well resolved from the lensing galaxy. Most of the candidates were picked while processing the data through the MDS pipeline. The current sample unfortunately suffers the same selection biases as the serendipitously discovered sample of gravitational lenses known at brighter magnitudes. At the expense of having a slightly incomplete sample, the lenses modeled in this paper are selected to have the highest probability of being good gravitational lens candidates. 

If one lowers the standard of acceptance, one can pick out hundreds more possible lens candidates, a small fraction of which may turn out to be gravitational lenses. After removal of the smooth axis-symmetric galaxy model images, the residuals sometimes configure symmetrically into possible gravitational lens candidates. Most of these residual images are probably bright regions of star formation within the very faint spiral arms around the central bulge of a galaxy. It is thus very unlikely that most of these objects are lenses. A spectroscopic study of a significant sample of these objects is unfortunately not practical using current ground based observations, and these candidates therefore do not represent a scientifically usable sample. They have therefore been excluded from the present list.

A case such as this was recently published by Fischer, Schade & Barrientos (1998). In fig 12 we show the region around this galaxy which appears to show an extended face-on spiral arm structure with the bright regions aligned along them. In addition, the best-fit lens model of the observed image configuration requires the adoption of a complex potential which is significantly misaligned from the light distribution. Although it will remain a candidate until spectroscopic observation is done, we suspect that these images are of star-formation regions, as found in the case reported in Glazebrook et al. (1994).

## 7 Conclusions

Gravitational lenses discovered using HST are especially useful because the lens galaxies are at great distances (typically $`z_L0.6`$), allowing for an independent and new method for the study of both galaxy evolution and cosmology.

A total of ten good candidates of gravitational lensing have been discovered in the HST Medium Deep Survey (MDS) and archival primary observations using WFPC2. Seven are “strong lens” candidates which appear to have multiple images of the source. Three are cases where the image of the source galaxy has been significantly distorted into an arc. We have summarized the data on all ten candidates and described them with simple models assuming singular isothermal potentials.

This paper is based on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. The Medium-Deep Survey was funded by STScI grant G02684 et seq. and by the HST WFPC2 Science Team under JPL subcontract 960772 from NASA contract NAS7-918. We acknowledge contributions of Dr Lyman Neuschaefer who was associated with the MDS pipeline. We thank Kristin Wintersteen and Julie Snyder who did High School Projects at CMU with the MDS database. We thank Drs. Stefano Casertano, Myungshin Im and Joseph Lehar for useful discussions, and our referee for useful comments.