1: %% 17 Mar 2003 -- Very first draft
2: %% 24 Mar 2003 -- ``draft1'' sent to co-authors
3: %% 22 Apr 2003 -- ``draft3'' sent to GOODS team
4: %% 30 Apr 2003 -- ``v4'' sent to GOODS team
5: %% 07 May 2003 -- ``v5'' sent to GOODS team
6: %% 12 May 2003 -- Submitted to ApJL
7: %% 12 May 2003 -- Rejected as a letter because of length.
8: %% 13 May 2003 -- Sent ``v7'' to GOODS team
9: %% 14 May 2003 -- Now fits on 4 pages in emulateapj. Submitted again to ApJL.
10: %% 26 Jun 2003 -- Retrieved updated tex file from mss.uchicago.edu/apj site
11: %% 09 Jul 2003 -- Resubmitted to ApJL.
12: %% 06 Aug 2003 -- Resubmitted to ApJL.
13: %%
14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
15: % Define a switch for submission mode
16: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
17:
18: \newif\ifsubmode
19: %\submodetrue
20: \submodefalse
21:
22: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
23: % Preamble
24: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
25:
26: \ifsubmode
27: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex} %% For preprint style with 12pt type
28: \received{}
29: \revised{}
30: \accepted{}
31: %\journalid{ }
32: %\articleid{ }{ }
33:
34: \else
35: \documentclass{emulateapj} %% To emulate ApJ style
36: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex} %% For 2-column preprint style
37: \slugcomment{Accepted for publication in ApJ Letters}
38: \fi
39:
40:
41: \shortauthors{Fassnacht et al.}
42: \shorttitle{GOODS Strong Gravtiational Lens Search}
43:
44:
45:
46: %\received{2003 May 13}
47: \begin{document}
48:
49: \title{Strong Gravitational Lens Candidates in the GOODS ACS Fields\altaffilmark{1}}
50:
51: \author{C. D. Fassnacht}
52: \affil{
53: Department of Physics,
54: University of California,
55: 1 Shields Avenue,
56: Davis, CA 95616
57: }
58: \email{fassnacht@physics.ucdavis.edu}
59:
60: \and
61:
62: \author{L. A. Moustakas, S. Casertano, H. C. Ferguson, R. A. Lucas,
63: Y. Park\altaffilmark{2}}
64: \affil{
65: Space Telescope Science Institute,
66: 3700 San Martin Drive,
67: Baltimore, MD 21218}
68: \email{leonidas, stefano, ferguson, lucas, ypark@stsci.edu}
69:
70: \altaffiltext{1}{Based on observations taken with the NASA/ESA
71: {\em Hubble Space
72: Telescope}, which is operated by the Association of Universities
73: for Research in Astronomy, Inc.\ (AURA) under NASA contract
74: NAS5--26555}
75: \altaffiltext{2}{Also
76: Department of Physics and Astronomy,
77: Johns Hopkins University,
78: Baltimore, MD 21218
79: }
80:
81: \begin{abstract}
82: We present results from a systematic search for strong gravitational
83: lenses in the GOODS ACS data. The search technique involves creating
84: a sample of likely lensing galaxies, which we define as massive
85: early-type galaxies in a redshift range $0.3<z<1.3$. The target
86: galaxies are selected by color and magnitude, giving a sample of 1092
87: galaxies. For each galaxy in the sample, we subtract a smooth
88: description of the galaxy light from the $z_{850}$-band data. The
89: residuals are examined, along with true-color images created from the
90: $B_{435}V_{606}i_{775}$ data, for morphologies indicative of strong
91: lensing. We present our six most promising lens candidates, as
92: well as our full list of candidates.
93:
94: \end{abstract}
95: \keywords{galaxies: general --- galaxies: high-redshift --- gravitational lensing --- surveys}
96:
97:
98: %\keywords{
99: % galaxies: general ---
100: % galaxies: high-redshift ---
101: % gravitational lensing ---
102: % surveys
103: %}
104:
105: \section{Introduction}
106:
107: A great strength of gravitational lenses as astrophysical tools is
108: that they provide direct measures of total mass, without the
109: requirement that the mass be luminous or baryonic. At the most basic
110: level, the image separation in lens systems provides a nearly
111: model-independent measurement of the projected mass of the lensing
112: galaxy \citep[e.g.,][]{csklensmass,wplensmass}.
113: %
114: The combination of additional observational constraints and more
115: sophisticated modeling can provide data on the elongation and
116: orientation of the mass distribution \citep[e.g.,][]{keetonshear}, the
117: radial mass profile of the lensing galaxy
118: \citep[e.g.,][]{kt0047,rusin1152,cskrings,wucknitz0218}, and the
119: possible existence of dark matter subhaloes
120: \citep[e.g.,][]{substruct,cdmstruct1,cdmstruct3,cdmstruct5,cdmstruct4}.
121: Therefore, gravitational lenses provide a wealth of information about
122: moderate redshift galaxies and can provide important insights into
123: galaxy evolution \citep[e.g.,][]{keetongalevol,rusingalevol}.
124: %
125: An increase in the number of known lenses benefits almost all these
126: studies and thus motivates searches for new lenses. The data obtained
127: with the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS)
128: on the {\em Hubble Space Telescope} as part of the Great Observatories
129: Origins Deep Survey \citep[GOODS;][] {goods} offers an unprecedented
130: combination of angular resolution, depth, and sky coverage. In this
131: paper we report the results of a systematic search for lenses in the
132: data obtained in the first three epochs of observations of the GOODS fields.
133:
134: \section{The target population}
135:
136: The search strategy that we used was focused on the likely lens
137: galaxies rather than the likely background sources. This is in
138: contrast to the searches conducted at radio wavelengths
139: \citep[e.g.,][]{class1,class2,winnsearch} and optical searches
140: targeting known quasars \citep[e.g.,][]{hstlens}. For this search, we
141: selected the objects most likely to produce strong lenses, namely
142: massive early-type galaxies at $0.3<z<1.3$. Theoretical studies
143: indicate that these galaxies should dominate the lensing population,
144: with only $\sim$10\% or fewer of strong lenses produced by spiral
145: galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{tog,ftlensrate,maozrix}. Similarly, a
146: ray-tracing analysis conducted on the northern Hubble Deep Field data
147: \citep[HDF-N;][]{hdfn} indicated that nearly all the lensing
148: cross-section was provided by massive ellipticals at $z \sim 1$
149: (Blandford, Surpi, \& Kundi\'c 2001). Thus, our target sample was chosen to
150: maximize the chance of finding massive early-type galaxies in the
151: desired redshift range.
152:
153: All candidate selection was done using the ACS data obtained in the
154: F435W, F606W, F775W, and F850LP filters (hereafter, $B_{435}$,
155: $V_{606}$, $i_{775}$, and $z_{850}$). We consider only objects with
156: isophotal magnitudes $z_{850,iso}<23.0$. Colors were measured in
157: matched apertures, with the apertures defined by the $z_{850}$-band
158: data\footnote{For complete details of the source extraction,
159: photometry, and limiting magnitudes, see \citet{goods}.}. In a
160: color-color plot of $(B_{435}-i_{775})$ vs $(i_{775}-z_{850})$,
161: galaxies at $z > 0.3$ with old stellar populations should lie in the
162: upper part of the diagram (see Figure 1). We define our target region as
163: $(B_{435}-i_{775}) > 2.0$, which produces a sample of 1092 galaxies.
164: Figure 1 also contains, as examples, no-evolution tracks for
165: different types of galaxies, which show solely the effect of spectral
166: features moving into different filter bands for galaxies at different
167: redshifts. Although the track for elliptical galaxies in Figure 1
168: would suggest that our target region contains ellipticals in a
169: wider redshift range than desired, the combination of the low volume
170: probed at low redshifts, cosmological dimming at high redshifts, and
171: evolution implies that the redshift range selected is closer to the
172: desired $0.3<z<1.3$. Based on comparisons with both non-evolving and
173: passive evolution models
174: \citep{kinneysed}, as well as spectroscopy of $\sim200$ galaxies in the
175: southern GOODS field, we find that the regions marked in the figure do
176: contain the vast majority of the massive early-type galaxies in the
177: relevant redshift interval. The target region also includes a large
178: contamination ($\sim20$\%) from highly-obscured systems (particularly
179: dusty bulge-dominated galaxies). Since our goal is to be as inclusive
180: as possible, without needing to examine the full catalog
181: % ($\sim$3000 galaxies brighter than $z_{iso}=23$)
182: in detail, this gives an adequate sample of target galaxies.
183:
184: \ifsubmode
185: \else
186: \begin{figure}
187: \plotone{f1.eps}
188: \caption{
189: Color-color diagram for galaxies in the GOODS southern field
190: $z_{850}$-selected catalog, limited to $z_{850,iso}<23.0$. The target
191: galaxies for the lens search lie above the dashed line. The open
192: symbols connected by lines represent the expected change with redshift
193: of colors for non-evolving elliptical (E), Sb, and starburst (SB6)
194: galaxies. The points are separated by $\Delta z = 0.1$, starting at
195: $z = 0$ and with solid points every $\Delta z = 0.5$. On each track,
196: the points corresponding to $z=0.5$ and $z=1.0$ are marked.
197: % The plot for the northern GOODS field is qualitatively similar.
198: \label{fig_ellselect}}
199: \end{figure}
200: \fi
201:
202: \section{Lens-search techniques}
203:
204: \subsection{Subtraction of galaxy models}
205:
206: Our primary technique for searching the target sample for
207: gravitational lens candidates was to model the light distribution of
208: the target galaxy and then subtract the model from the data. The
209: residuals for each target were examined for indications of
210: gravitational lensing. To increase the robustness of our results, we
211: used two methods to subtract the galaxy emission for each target.
212:
213: The first method used customized IDL scripts that provided an
214: empirical description of the target galaxy emission. The galaxy
215: centroid, ellipticity, and position angle were calculated from the
216: light distribution. The input image was split into a series of
217: concentric ellipses, each with the input ellipticity and position
218: angle. The empirical description of the galaxy emission was then
219: produced by boxcar-smoothing the distribution of flux as a function of
220: semi-major axis. This simple approach provided acceptable
221: representations of most of the target galaxies, and non-symmetric
222: features were clearly visible in the residual images produced by
223: subtracting the smoothed image from the input. To judge the
224: effectiveness of the technique in subtracting smoothly-distributed
225: galaxy light, we use as a figure of merit the ratio of the counts in
226: the residual image to the counts in the original image, summed within
227: a 3\arcsec-diameter aperture. For $\sim$75\% of the targets, this
228: ratio was less than 0.05, indicating a good fit to the galaxy emission.
229: All targets producing higher ratios had
230: either close neighbors or the kind of asymmetric structure that the
231: routine was designed to find, e.g., knots of star formation, bars,
232: dust lanes, possible lensed images, etc.
233: %
234: Thus, this method is sensitive to compact lensed images and to
235: tangentially stretched arcs. However, complete or nearly complete
236: Einstein rings would be subtracted away by this method. Therefore, we
237: used a second galaxy-subtraction method to complement the empirical
238: technique.
239:
240: The second technique involved fitting parametric models to all
241: candidate lens galaxies. Experimentation with various combinations of
242: parametric laws \citep[using GALFIT;][]{galfit} showed that a single
243: Sersic fit did remarkably well for the majority of galaxies in our
244: sample, with a median $\chi^2_{fit}/\nu\approx0.9$. In most of the
245: cases, the residuals produced by the GALFIT subtraction did not differ
246: qualitatively from those produced by the empirical method, and no
247: believable lens candidates were found solely from an examination of
248: the GALFIT residuals.
249:
250: \subsection{Selection Criteria}
251:
252: The residuals produced by the galaxy-subtraction methods were
253: carefully examined, as were the unsubtracted true-color
254: ($B_{435}V_{606}i_{775}$) images of the target galaxies. The latter
255: provided invaluable color information about features in the target
256: images, which was incorporated into the candidate selection process.
257: The criteria used to select lens candidates were based on features
258: commonly seen in HST images of strong gravitational
259: lenses\footnote{The CfA-Arizona Space Telescope Lens Survey web site,
260: at \url{http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/castles/} provides an excellent
261: compilation of such images.}. Any one of the following features seen
262: in either the residual images or in the true-color images would cause
263: a target to be flagged as a possible lens candidate: (1) two compact
264: images on opposite sides of the target galaxy; (2) multiple (more than
265: two) compact images arranged in a typical lensing morphology, (3) an
266: arc, possibly with a faint counterimage, tangentially stretched
267: relative to the target galaxy, especially if the arc is bluer than the
268: galaxy, (4) a ring of possibly blue emission surrounding the target
269: galaxy. Because gravitational lensing is an achromatic phenomenon,
270: the alleged lensed images should have the same colors. However, some
271: leeway was allowed to incorporate the possible effects of differential
272: extinction \citep[e.g.,][]{rdb1608,falcodust}.
273: Two of the authors independently examined all of the target galaxies. The
274: list presented in Table~\ref{tab_allcand} is the union of the two
275: selections.
276:
277: \ifsubmode
278: \else
279: \begin{figure*}
280: \plotone{f2.eps}
281: \figcaption{Plots showing the $B_{435}V_{606}i_{775}$
282: images for our top six lens candidates. All plots are 3\arcsec\ on a side
283: with the exception of the plots for J033213$-$274946, which is 4.5\arcsec\ on
284: a side, and J123730+621301, which is 7\arcsec\ on a side..
285: \label{fig_cand1}}
286: \end{figure*}
287: \fi
288:
289: \section{Discussion}
290:
291: The systematic search produced a list of 48
292: % from goodcand* lists
293: candidates of varying quality. The biggest difficulty in selecting
294: candidates was to differentiate rings or arcs of star formation from
295: lensing morphologies. Most of the candidates have morphologies
296: consisting of arc- or point-like blue features near red galaxies, with
297: no clear counterimages; these were accepted as candidates because the
298: faint counterimages might be below the detection threshold. All of
299: the authors voted on which of the 48 candidates were most likely to
300: be lenses.
301: %Our six top candidates are presented
302: %in Table~\ref{tab_goodcand} and Figure~\ref{fig_cand1}.
303: We list our six top candidates
304: in Table~\ref{tab_goodcand} and show them in Figure~\ref{fig_cand1}.
305: Further followup is necessary to establish more definitively which of
306: the systems are real gravitational lenses. Therefore, we present the
307: full list of candidates and their coordinates in
308: Table~\ref{tab_allcand} so that interested readers can make their own
309: selection of most promising lens candidates and target selected
310: systems for additional observations\footnote{See also
311: \url{http://www.stsci.edu/science/goods/lensing/Lenscands/lenscands.html}
312: for images of the full list of candidates.}.
313: We note that the northern GOODS field includes the HDF-N area, which
314: was searched extensively for gravitational lenses. The two best lens
315: candidates found in those searches, J123652+621227 and J123656+621221
316: \citep{hogghdf,zmdhdf}, are detected in the GOODS data. The former is
317: fainter than our magnitude cutoff at $z_{850,iso}=23.7$; the latter is
318: in the target sample and was independently selected as lens candidate
319: GDS J123657$+$621220 (Figure~\ref{fig_cand1}).
320:
321: In this letter, we will provide only first-order estimates of the
322: properties of our six best candidates. Systems for which later
323: observations clearly establish the lensing nature will be treated more
324: fully in forthcoming papers.
325: A nearly model-independent quantity that may be derived from lens
326: system data is the mass of the lensing galaxy within a cylinder of
327: radius $\theta_E$, the Einstein ring radius. In cases with clear
328: multiple images, a good estimate of $\theta_E$ is simply half the
329: image separation.
330: %(this is an exact relation for a SIS).
331: However, in most of the lens candidates presented in this letter, an
332: arc is seen, but no counterimage is detected. Although this presents
333: a difficulty, we note that in cases where an arc is highly magnified
334: compared to the counterimage, the arc lies very close to the critical
335: curve of the lens. Thus, in these cases the distance from the galaxy
336: to the arc provides a reasonable estimator of $\theta_E$.
337: We have used the $V$-band images to estimate $\theta_E$ for the
338: candidates because both the blue and red objects are detected at high
339: significance in these images. In Table~\ref{tab_goodcand} we provide
340: estimated Einstein ring radii ($\theta_{E,est}$) as well as the target
341: galaxy magnitudes in apertures with radii $\theta = \theta_{E,est}$.
342: More extensive descriptions of the properties of the lens galaxies will
343: become possible with spectroscopic data and more detailed modeling.
344:
345:
346: \section{Summary and Future Work
347: \label{summary}
348: }
349:
350: In this paper we have presented the results of a systematic search for
351: strong gravitational lens candidates in the GOODS ACS data. The
352: search targeted massive early-type galaxies in the redshift range
353: $0.3<z<1.3$, i.e., the sources most likely to produce strong lenses.
354: We have presented a list of 48 lens candidates as well as images of
355: our six most promising candidates. The search was conducted on images that are
356: not yet at the full depth expected from the GOODS survey; however, we
357: do not expect the $\sim$30\% increase in sensitivity provided by the
358: incorporation of the last two epochs of the GOODS observations to
359: yield a significant increase in the number of lens candidates. The
360: best candidates are being targeted for spectroscopic observations, in
361: order to confirm or reject the lensing hypothesis. Based on these
362: data, we will be able to measure accurate masses, mass-to-light
363: ratios, and other parameters of the confirmed lens systems.
364:
365:
366:
367: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
368:
369: \acknowledgments
370:
371: The GOODS project is very much a team effort, and we would like to
372: thank all the members of the collaboration, and especially Anton Koekemoer
373: for his help, patience, and goodwill. We are grateful to Lori Lubin
374: and Chris Conselice for useful discussions and to Jeff Valenti for his
375: %willingness to share his
376: IDL expertise. We thank the referee for
377: comments that improved the paper.
378: We are indebted to the shuttle astronauts who, as we have
379: been so painfully reminded, risk their lives so that we can study the
380: Universe. Support for this work was provided by NASA through grant
381: GO09583.01-96A from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is
382: operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy,
383: under NASA contract NAS5-26555. Support for this work, part of the
384: {\em Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF)} Legacy Science
385: Program, was provided by NASA through contract number 1224666 issued
386: by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
387: under NASA contract 1407.
388:
389:
390: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
391:
392: \ifsubmode
393: \newpage
394: \fi
395:
396: \begin{thebibliography}{}
397:
398: \bibitem[Bahcall et al.(1992)]{hstlens}Bahcall, J. N., Maoz, D.,
399: Doxsey, R., Schneider, D. P., Bahcall, N. A., Lahav, O., \& Yanny, B.
400: 1992, \apj, 387, 56
401:
402: \bibitem[Bertin \& Arnouts(1996)]{sextractor}Bertin, E. \& Arnouts, S.
403: 1996, \aaps, 117, 393
404:
405: \bibitem[Blandford et al.(2001)]{rdb1608}Blandford, R.,
406: Surpi, G., \& Kundi\'c, T. 2001, in ASP Conf.\ Ser.\ 237,
407: Gravitational Lensing: Recent Progress and Future Goals, ed.\
408: T. G. Brainerd \& C. S. Kochanek (San Francisco: ASP), 65
409:
410: \bibitem[Brada{\v c} et al.(2002)]{cdmstruct5} Brada{\v c}, M.,
411: Schneider, P., Steinmetz, M., Lombardi, M., King, L.~J., \& Porcas, R.\
412: 2002, \aap, 388, 373
413:
414: \bibitem[Browne et al.(2003)]{class2}Browne, I. W. A., et al.\ 2003,
415: \mnras, 341, 13
416:
417: %\bibitem[Chiba(2002)]{cdmstruct2}Chiba, M. 2002, \apj, 565, 17
418:
419: %\bibitem[Cohn et al.(2001)]{cohn1933}Cohn, J. D., Kochanek, C. S.,
420: %McLeod, B. A., \& Keeton, C. R. 2001, \apj, 554, 1216
421:
422: \bibitem[Dalal \& Kochanek(2002)]{cdmstruct3}Dalal, N. \& Kochanek, C. S.
423: 2002, \apj, 572, 25 %(astro-ph/0111456)
424:
425: \bibitem[Falco et al.(1999)]{falcodust}Falco, E. E., et al.\
426: 1999, \apj, 523, 617
427:
428: %\bibitem[Fukugita et al.(1992)]{fukugita}Fukugita, M., Futumatse, T.,
429: Kasai, M., \& Turner, E. L. 1992, \apj, 393, 3
430:
431: \bibitem[Fukugita \& Turner(1991)]{ftlensrate}Fukugita, M.
432: \& Turner, E. L. 1991, \mnras, 253, 99
433:
434: \bibitem[Giavalisco et al.(2003)]{goods}Giavalisco, M. et al.,
435: \apjl, submitted
436:
437: \bibitem[Hogg et al.(1996)]{hogghdf} Hogg, D. W., Blandford,
438: R., Kundic, T., Fassnacht, C. D., \& Malhotra, S.\ 1996, \apjl, 467, L73
439:
440: \bibitem[Keeton, Kochanek, \& Seljak(1997)]{keetonshear} Keeton,
441: C. R., Kochanek, C. S., \& Seljak, U. 1997, \apj, 482, 604
442:
443: \bibitem[Keeton, Kochanek, \& Seljak(1998)]{keetongalevol}Keeton, C. R.,
444: Kochanek, C. S., \& Falco, E. E. 1998, \apj, 509, 561
445:
446: %\bibitem[Keeton et al.(2000)]{keeton0957}Keeton, C. R., et al.\ 2000,
447: %\apj, 542, 74
448:
449: % \bibitem[Keeton(2001)]{lensmodel}Keeton, C. R. 2001, \apj, submitted
450: % (astro-ph/0102340)
451:
452: %\bibitem[Keeton \& Winn(2003)]{keetonquint}Keeton, C. R. \& Winn, J. N.
453: %2003, \apj, in press (astro-ph/0302364)
454:
455: \bibitem[Kinney et al.(1996)]{kinneysed}Kinney, A. L., Calzetti, D.,
456: Bohlin, R. C., McQuade, K., Storchi-Bergmann, T., \& Schmitt, H. R. 1996,
457: \apj, 467, 38
458:
459: \bibitem[Kochanek(1991)]{csklensmass}Kochanek, C. S. 1991, \apj, 373, 354
460:
461: %\bibitem[Kochanek(1995)]{csk1654}Kochanek, C. S. 1995, \apj, 445, 559
462:
463: \bibitem[Kochanek et al.(2001)]{cskrings}Kochanek, C. S.,
464: Keeton, C. R., \& McLeod, B. M. 2001, \apj, 547, 50
465:
466: \bibitem[Koopmans \& Treu(2003)]{kt0047}Koopmans, L. V. E. \&
467: Treu, T.\ 2003, \apj, 583, 606
468:
469: %\bibitem[Madgwick et al.(2002)]{2dfegals} Madgwick, D. S., et
470: %al.\ 2002, \mnras, 333, 133
471:
472: \bibitem[Mao \& Schneider(1998)]{substruct}Mao, S. \& Schneider, P. 1998,
473: \mnras, 295, 587
474:
475: \bibitem[Maoz \& Rix(1993)]{maozrix}Maoz, D. \& Rix, H.-W. 1993, \apj,
476: 416, 443
477:
478: \bibitem[Metcalf \& Madau(2001)]{cdmstruct1} Metcalf, R. B. \&
479: Madau, P. 2001, \apj, 563, 9
480:
481: \bibitem[Mobasher et al.(2003)]{goodsphotoz}Mobasher, B., Jogee, S.,
482: Dahlen, T., De Mello, D., Lucas, R., Conselice, C., \& Livio, M.
483: 2003, \apjl, submitted
484:
485: \bibitem[Moustakas \& Metcalf(2003)]{cdmstruct4}Moustakas, L. A. \&
486: Metcalf, R. B. 2003, \mnras, 339, 607
487:
488: \bibitem[Myers et al.(2003)]{class1}Myers, S. T., et al.\ 2003,
489: \mnras, 341, 1
490:
491: % \bibitem[Narayan \& Bartelmann(1999)]{nblec} Narayan, R. \&
492: % Bartelmann, M. 1999, in Formation of Structure in the Universe,
493: % ed.\ A. Dekel and J. P. Ostriker. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 360
494:
495: \bibitem[Peng et al.(2002)]{galfit}Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D.,
496: \& Rix, H.-W. 2002, \aj, 124, 266
497:
498: %\bibitem[Refsdal(1964)]{refsdal}Refsdal, S. 1964, \mnras, 128, 307
499:
500: %\bibitem[Rusin et al.(2001)]{rusin1359}Rusin, D., et al.\ 2001, \apj, 557, 594
501:
502: \bibitem[Rusin et al.(2002)]{rusin1152}Rusin, D., Norbury, M., Biggs, A. D.,
503: Marlow, D. R., Jackson, N. J., Browne, I. W. A., Wilkinson, P. N., \&
504: Myers, S. T. 2002, \mnras, 330, 205
505:
506: \bibitem[Rusin et al.(2003)]{rusingalevol}Rusin, D., et al.\ 2003,
507: \apj, 587, 143
508:
509: %\bibitem[Treu \& Koopmans(2002)]{tk2016}Treu, T. \& Koopmans, L. V. E.
510: %2002, \apj, 575, 87
511:
512: %\bibitem[Turner(1990)]{turner}Turner, E. L. 1990, \apjl, 365, 43
513:
514: \bibitem[Turner, Ostriker, \& Gott(1984)]{tog}Turner, E. L., Ostriker, J. P.,
515: \& Gott, J. R. III 1984, \apj, 284, 1
516:
517: \bibitem[Wambsganss \& Paczy\'nski(1994)]{wplensmass}Wambsganss, J. \&
518: Paczy\'nski, B. 1994, \aj, 108, 1156
519:
520: \bibitem[Winn et al.(2000)]{winnsearch}Winn, J. N., et al.\ 2000, \aj,
521: 120, 2868
522:
523: \bibitem[Williams et al.(1996)]{hdfn}Williams, R. E., et al.\ 1996, \aj,
524: 112, 1335
525:
526: \bibitem[Wucknitz et al.(2003)]{wucknitz0218}Wucknitz, O., Biggs, A. D.,
527: \& Browne, I. W. A. 2003, \mnras, submitted
528:
529: \bibitem[Zepf, Moustakas, \& Davis(1997)]{zmdhdf} Zepf, S. E.,
530: Moustakas, L. A., \& Davis, M.\ 1997, \apjl, 474, L1
531:
532: \end{thebibliography}
533:
534: \ifsubmode
535: \clearpage
536: \fi
537:
538: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrrrrl}
539: \tablewidth{0pt}
540: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
541: \tablecaption{Lens Candidates\label{tab_allcand}}
542: \tablehead{
543: \colhead{ID}
544: & \colhead{RA(2000)}
545: & \colhead{Dec(2000)}
546: & \colhead{$B_{435iso}$}
547: & \colhead{$V_{606,iso}$}
548: & \colhead{$i_{775,iso}$}
549: & \colhead{$z_{850,iso}$}
550: & \colhead{$z_{phot}$\tablenotemark{a}}
551: }
552: \startdata
553: GDS J033206$-$274729 & 03 32 06.431 & $-$27 47 28.76 & 23.83 & 22.94 & 21.78 & 21.09 & 0.96 \\ %s-v1.7-16475
554: GDS J033211$-$274650 & 03 32 11.403 & $-$27 46 49.98 & 24.42 & 22.77 & 21.70 & 21.34 & 0.46 \\ %s-v1.7-16769
555: GDS J033213$-$274946 & 03 32 13.006 & $-$27 49 46.08 & 24.02 & 21.98 & 20.65 & 20.19 & 0.55 \\ %s-v1.7-12124
556: GDS J033215$-$274157 & 03 32 14.825 & $-$27 41 57.17 & 25.38 & 23.60 & 22.37 & 22.00 & 0.55 \\ %s-v1.7-24097
557: GDS J033216$-$274714 & 03 32 15.805 & $-$27 47 13.61 & 24.44 & 22.44 & 20.98 & 20.51 & 0.62 \\ %s-v1.7-15592
558: \enddata
559: \tablecomments{Units of right ascension are hours, minutes, and seconds.
560: Units of declination are degrees, arcminutes, and arcseconds.
561: [The complete version of this table is in the electronic edition of the Journal.
562: The printed edition contains only a sample.]}
563: \tablenotetext{a}{Photometric redshifts determined as described in
564: \citet{goodsphotoz}.
565: Photometric redshifts for the northern
566: GOODS sources
567: %in the northern GOODS field
568: are being determined.}
569: \end{deluxetable}
570:
571: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrlrrrrrl}
572: \tablewidth{0pt}
573: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
574: %\footnotesize
575: \tablecaption{Parameters of Candidate Lens Galaxies\label{tab_goodcand}}
576: \tablehead{
577: \colhead{ID}
578: & \colhead{RA(2000)}
579: & \colhead{Dec(2000)}
580: & \colhead{$z_{phot}$\tablenotemark{a}}
581: & \colhead{$\theta_{E,est}$\tablenotemark{b}}
582: & \colhead{$B_{435,E}$\tablenotemark{c}}
583: & \colhead{$V_{606,E}$\tablenotemark{c}}
584: & \colhead{$i_{775,E}$\tablenotemark{c}}
585: & \colhead{$z_{850,E}$\tablenotemark{c}}
586: & \colhead{Notes\tablenotemark{d}}
587: }
588: \startdata
589: GDS J033213$-$274946 & 03 32 13.006 & $-$27 49 46.08 & 0.55 & 0.96 & 24.82 & 22.35 & 20.93 & 20.48 & Blob + possible CI \\ %s-v1.7-12124
590: GDS J033231$-$275612 & 03 32 31.067 & $-$27 56 12.34 & 0.57 & 0.62 & 25.00 & 23.10 & 21.82 & 21.42 & Arc \\ %s-v1.7-00785
591: %GDS J033236$-$274812 & 03 32 35.961 & $-$27 48 11.87 & 0.44 & 0.40 & 24.37 & 22.96 & 22.01 & 21.79 & \\ %s-v1.7-11813 %
592: GDS J033240$-$274910 & 03 32 39.598 & $-$27 49 09.57 & 0.75 & 1.31 & 25.52 & 23.18 & 21.69 & 20.80 & Faint CI \\ %s-v1.7-10001
593: %GDS J033242$-$275157 & 03 32 41.637 & $-$27 51 57.44 & 0.75 & 1.23 & 24.70 & 22.65 & 21.13 & 20.53 & \\ %s-v1.7-05425 %
594: %GDS J123610$+$620845 & 12 36 09.581 & $+$62 08 45.12 & \nodata & 0.39 & 24.90 & 23.56 & 22.25 & 21.68 & \\ %n-v1.7-00862 %
595: %GDS J123625$+$621301 & 12 36 25.058 & $+$62 13 01.01 & \nodata & 1.07 & 24.10 & 22.15 & 20.99 & 20.60 & \\ %n-v1.7-08761 %
596: GDS J123641$+$621125 & 12 36 41.139 & $+$62 11 25.32 & \nodata & 0.73 & 26.82 & 24.95 & 23.57 & 22.73 & Faint arc \\ %n-v1.7-09793
597: GDS J123657$+$621220 & 12 36 56.642 & $+$62 12 20.45 & \nodata & 1.00 & 25.77 & 24.25 & 22.71 & 21.97 & Arc \\ %n-v1.7-13652
598: GDS J123730$+$621301 & 12 37 29.900 & $+$62 13 01.15 & \nodata & 1.98 & 23.10 & 21.29 & 20.22 & 19.85 & Multiple arcs (+CI?) \\ %n-v1.7-19788
599: \enddata
600: \tablecomments{Units of right ascension are hours, minutes, and seconds.
601: Units of declination are degrees, arcminutes, and arcseconds.}
602: \tablenotetext{a}{Photometric redshifts determined as described in
603: \citet{goodsphotoz}.
604: Photometric redshifts for the northern GOODS sources
605: are being determined.}
606: \tablenotetext{b}{Estimated Einstein ring radius, in arcseconds.}
607: \tablenotetext{c}{Magnitude within an aperture of radius $\theta_{E,est}$.}
608: \tablenotetext{d}{CI = counter-image.}
609: \end{deluxetable}
610:
611: \ifsubmode
612: \clearpage
613:
614: \begin{figure}
615: \plotone{f1.eps}
616: \caption{
617: Color-color diagram for galaxies in the GOODS southern field
618: $z_{850}$-selected catalog, limited to $z_{850,iso}<23.0$. The target
619: galaxies for the lens search lie above the dashed line. The open
620: symbols connected by lines represent the expected change with redshift
621: of colors for non-evolving elliptical (E), Sb, and starburst (SB6)
622: galaxies. The points are separated by $\Delta z = 0.1$, starting at
623: $z = 0$ and with solid points every $\Delta z = 0.5$. On each track,
624: the points corresponding to $z=0.5$ and $z=1.0$ are marked.
625: % The plot for the northern GOODS field is qualitatively similar.
626: \label{fig_ellselect}}
627: \end{figure}
628:
629: \begin{figure}
630: \plotone{f2.eps}
631: \figcaption{Plots showing the $B_{435}V_{606}i_{775}$
632: images for our top six lens candidates. All plots are 3\arcsec\ on a side
633: with the exception of the plots for J033213$-$274946, which is 4.5\arcsec\ on
634: a side, and J123730+621301, which is 7\arcsec\ on a side..
635: \label{fig_cand1}}
636: \end{figure}
637:
638: \fi
639:
640: \end{document}
641:
642: