text:
# Quasiclassical negative magnetoresistance of a 2D electron gas: interplay of strong scatterers and smooth disorder

## Abstract

We study the quasiclassical magnetotransport of non-interacting fermions in two dimensions moving in a random array of strong scatterers (antidots, impurities or defects) on the background of a smooth random potential. We demonstrate that the combination of the two types of disorder induces a novel mechanism leading to a strong negative magnetoresistance, followed by the saturation of the magnetoresistivity $`\rho _{xx}(B)`$ at a value determined solely by the smooth disorder. Experimental relevance to the transport in semiconductor heterostructures is discussed.

Magnetotransport in a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) has been the subject of intensive research during the last two decades. This interest has been motivated by the progress in preparing high-quality semiconductor heterostructures, opening up new areas in both fundamental physics and applications, see  for a review. Within the quasiclassical approach (valid for not too strong magnetic fields $`B`$), impurity scattering is commonly described by a collision integral in the Boltzmann equation. This leads, for an isotropic system, to the $`B`$-independent Drude value of the longitudinal resistivity, $`\rho _{xx}(B)=\rho _0m/e^2n_e\tau `$, where $`n_e`$ is the carrier density, $`m`$ the effective mass, and $`\tau `$ the transport scattering time.

It has become clear, however, that this description is not always valid. In particular, in the case of smooth disorder memory effects induce a strong positive magnetoresistance (MR)  followed by an exponential fall-off of $`\rho _{xx}(B)`$ due to adiabatic localization of drifting electrons . To our knowledge, these effects have not been experimentally observed in the electron transport in low magnetic fields, since the Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations develop at lower magnetic fields. On the other hand, the memory effects do show up in the composite fermion transport, explaining the peculiar shape of the MR around half-filling of the lowest Landau level .

In the present paper we study the quasiclassical MR of a 2DEG moving in a random array of rare strong scatterers (modeled by hard disks) and subject additionally to a smooth random potential. Apart from the purely theoretical interest, our work has been motivated by two types of experimental realizations of this problem. The first one is random antidot arrays. Experiments on this kind of structures  show a strong negative MR which has not been analyzed theoretically. Less obviously, our model is relevant to transport in the unstructured high-mobility 2DEG. To clarify this point, we recall that in order to increase the 2DEG mobility the donors in currently fabricated heterostructures are separated by a large distance $`dk_F^1`$ (with $`k_F`$ the Fermi wave number) from the 2DEG plane. It is usually assumed that these remote donors constitute the main source of disorder, inducing small-angle scattering of electrons. It is known, however, that in samples with a wide spacer ($`d70\mathrm{nm}`$) large-angle scattering on residual impurities  and interface roughness  becomes important, limiting the mobility with further increasing width of the spacer. In particular, Ref.  concludes that about 50% of the resistivity is determined by such scattering processes, while Ref.  finds that for samples with very high mobility this value is as high as $`90\%`$.

We thus consider the following two-component model of disorder: (i) randomly distributed hard-core scatterers (which we will term “antidots” or “impurities” below) with density $`n_S`$ and radius $`a`$ (where $`n_S^{1/2}ak_F^1`$), and (ii) smooth random potential (correlation radius $`d`$, momentum relaxation rate $`\tau _L^1`$, transport mean free path $`l_L=v_F\tau _L`$). The mean free path for the scattering on antidots is $`l_S^{(0)}v_F\tau _S^{(0)}=1/2n_Sa`$, while the corresponding transport mean free path may be somewhat different, $`l_Sv_F\tau _S=\gamma l_S^{(0)}`$ with $`\gamma 1`$ ($`\gamma =3/4`$ in the model of specularly reflecting disks). We will set $`\gamma =1`$ for qualitative estimates. We will further assume that $`\tau _L\tau _S`$, so that the zero-$`B`$ resistivity $`\rho _0`$ is determined by the hard scatterers, $`\tau ^1=\tau _L^1+\tau _S^1\tau _S^1`$. Finally, we will assume that the motion in the smooth disorder is not adiabatic, i.e. has the form of the guiding center diffusion (rather than drift). The condition for this is $`\delta d`$, where $`𝜹`$ is the guiding center shift after one cyclotron revolution \[see Eq. (2)\]. For currently fabricated samples this assumption is usually satisfied in the whole range of applicability of the quasiclassical theory.

We start the analysis of the problem by recalling the results  for the case when only hard scatterers are present ($`\tau _L=\mathrm{}`$), known as the Lorentz gas. In this limit the resistivity $`\rho _{xx}(B)`$ reads

$$\rho _{xx}(B)/\rho _0=(1e^{2\pi /\omega _c\tau _S^{(0)}})(\omega _c\tau _S),$$
(1)
where $`\omega _c=eB/mc`$ is the cyclotron frequency and $`(x)`$ is a function of order unity with the asymptotics $`(x1)=1`$ and $`(x1)=\gamma `$. The first factor in Eq. (1) is nothing else but the fraction of particles moving in rosette-like trajectories around the impurities and hitting a new impurity with the mean free time $`\tau _S^{(0)}`$. The rest of the particles do not hit scatterers at all. In the sequel, we will only consider classically strong magnetic fields, $`\omega _c\omega _\tau 2\pi /\tau _S^{(0)}`$, where the resistivity (1) shows a $`1/B`$ fall-off. Equation (1) is valid below the percolation threshold, $`\omega _c<\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}=1.67v_Fn_S^{1/2}`$ (note that $`\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}\tau _Sn_S^{1/2}a^11`$). For larger magnetic fields, $`\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$, the resistivity is exactly zero, since the rosette-like families of cyclotron orbits associated with each impurity fail to form an infinite cluster.

Clearly, adding the long-range disorder will increase the diffusion constant $`D_{xx}`$ and thus, in the limit $`\omega _c\tau _S1`$, the longitudinal resistivity, by setting free those particles which are localized in cyclotron orbits not hitting impurities. We will be interested in the case of a sufficiently strong smooth disorder modifying the result (1) in an essential way. Specifically, we will see below that new physics emerges in the regime $`\delta a`$, where

$$\delta ^2𝜹^2=4\pi l_L^2/(\omega _c\tau _L)^3.$$
(2)
Let us first outline this new physics on a qualitative level. Naively, one could think that for $`\delta a`$ the resistivity should take its Drude value. Indeed, let us associate with the particle trajectory a strip of width $`2a`$ surrounding it. The particle will hit an impurity if the center of the latter is located within this strip. Clearly, in one cyclotron revolution the particle “explores” in this way the area $`2v_Fa\times 2\pi /\omega _c`$, the same as it would explore in the same time for $`B=0`$. For $`\delta a`$ the area explored in the second revolution will overlap only weakly with that explored in the first one, so that one could think that the exploration rate is essentially the same as for $`B=0`$, leading to the mean time $`\tau _S^{(0)}`$ between the collisions, and thus to $`\rho _{xx}\rho _0`$. This consideration is, however, incorrect, since it neglects memory effects. Specifically, there is a probability $`P_1a/\delta `$ that the strip after the first revolution covers again the starting point (or, in other words, there is typically a small relative overlap $`a/\delta `$). In view of the diffusive dynamics of the guiding center, the return probability decreases rather slowly with the number of revolutions, $`P_n=P_1/\sqrt{n}`$. Therefore, the total return probability $`P=_{n=1}^NP_n`$ is determined by the upper cut-off $`N`$, so that the memory effect is much stronger than one might at first sight expect, $`P(a/\delta )N^{1/2}a/\delta `$.

When the memory effect leads only to a small correction to the Drude value (the corresponding condition will be specified below), the upper cut-off is given by the number of cyclotron revolutions it takes for the particle to hit the next impurity, $`N=\omega _c\tau _S^{(0)}/2\pi `$, so that the total return probability is $`P(a/\delta )(\omega _c\tau _S)^{1/2}`$. This determines the fraction of the area explored twice, implying an effective reduction of the exploration rate and thus a negative correction to the resistivity,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}/\rho _0(a/\delta )(\omega _c\tau _S)^{1/2}(\omega _c/\omega _0)^2,$$
(3)
where $`\omega _0v_F(a^2l_Sl_L)^{1/4}\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}(l_S/l_L)^{1/4}\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$.

We turn now to a more rigorous and quantitative derivation. Generalizing the formalism of  to the present case, we start from the following Liouville-Boltzmann equation for the distribution function $`g(𝐫,\varphi )`$ of electrons on the Fermi surface,

$`(L_0+\delta L)g(𝐫,\varphi )=\mathrm{cos}(\varphi \varphi _E),`$ (4)
$`L_0=v_F𝐧+\omega _c{\displaystyle \frac{}{\varphi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _L}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\varphi ^2}},`$ (5)
$`\delta L={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}I_{𝐑_i},`$ (6)
where $`𝐧=(\mathrm{cos}\varphi ,\mathrm{sin}\varphi )`$ is the unit vector determining the direction of velocity, $`𝐯=v_F𝐧`$, and $`\varphi _E`$ is the polar angle of the electric field. The operator $`L_0`$ describes the motion in the smooth random potential, while $`\delta L`$ corresponds to the scattering on antidots with (random) positions $`𝐑_i`$. The explicit form of the collision operator $`I_𝐑`$ (for a hard-wall scatterer) can be found in , but we will not need it. We will only use the following properties of $`I_𝐑`$: (i) it is non-zero only within the distance $`a`$ from the impurity location $`𝐑`$, and (ii) its Fourier-transform $`\stackrel{~}{I}_𝐪`$ satisfies $`\stackrel{~}{I}_0𝐧=(1/n_S\tau _S)𝐧`$.

Expanding in $`\delta L`$, averaging over the positions $`𝐑_i`$ of scatterers, and resumming the series, one finds the Green’s function of the Liouville operator, $`(L_0+\delta L)^1=(L_0+M)^1`$, where $`M`$ is the “self-energy” operator. The resistivity is expressed in terms of $`M`$ as follows ,

$$\rho _{xx}=(m/e^2n_e)(\tau _L^1+M_{xx}),$$
(7)
where $`M_{xx}=(d\varphi /\pi )\mathrm{cos}\varphi M\mathrm{cos}\varphi `$. One may use a diagrammatic technique analogous to that developed for the Lorentz gas  to calculate $`M`$. The leading term corresponds to a single scattering process, yielding $`M^{(1)}=n_S\stackrel{~}{I}_0`$ and thus the Drude contribution, $`M_{xx}^{(1)}=\tau _S^1`$, to the resistivity (7). The next-order contribution representing the correction induced by the return process is obtained as

$$M_{xx}^{(2)}=n_S\frac{d\varphi }{\pi }\mathrm{cos}\varphi I_𝐑D^{(1)}I_𝐑\mathrm{cos}\varphi ,$$
(8)
where $`D^{(1)}=(L_0+M^{(1)})^1`$ is the electron propagator with the leading-order self-energy included.

Since $`\delta a`$, the propagator $`D^{(1)}(𝐫𝐫^{},\varphi ,\varphi ^{})`$ describing propagation from the point $`𝐫^{},\varphi ^{}`$ to the point $`𝐫,\varphi `$ can be replaced in (8) by $`D^{(1)}(0,\varphi ,\varphi ^{})`$. Furthermore, we note that once the particle hits an impurity, its guiding center is shifted by an amount of order of the cyclotron radius $`R_c`$. As a result, the contribution of such trajectories to $`D^{(1)}`$ can be neglected and only non-colliding orbits should be taken into account. Since the motion without collisions is limited by the times $`\tau _S\tau _L`$, the particle will return with almost the same direction of velocity, i.e. $`D^{(1)}(0,\varphi ,\varphi ^{})`$ will be peaked at $`\varphi \varphi ^{}`$. We can thus approximate $`D^{(1)}(0,\varphi ,\varphi ^{})`$ by $`D_0^{(1)}\delta (\varphi \varphi ^{})`$, where $`D_0^{(1)}=𝑑\varphi D^{(1)}(0,\varphi ,\varphi ^{})`$. This quantity is easily found to be

$$D_0^{(1)}=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{e^{2\pi n/\omega _c\tau _S^{(0)}}}{(\pi n)^{1/2}v_F\delta }\frac{(\omega _c\tau _S^{(0)})^{1/2}}{(2\pi )^{1/2}v_F\delta }.$$
(9)
Substituting this in (8) and using that $`\stackrel{~}{I}_0𝐧=(1/n_S\tau _S)𝐧`$, we find $`M_{xx}^{(2)}=(1/n_S\tau _S^2)D_0^{(1)}`$. This implies, according to (7), the negative MR,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}/\rho _0=M_{xx}^{(2)}/\tau _S^1=\omega _c^2/\omega _0^2,\omega _c\omega _0,$$
(10)
where

$$\omega _0=(2\pi n_S)^{1/2}v_F(2\gamma l_S/l_L)^{1/4},$$
(11)
in agreement with the above qualitative considerations.

This derivation is valid as long as the correction remains small, i.e. for $`\omega _c\omega _0`$. For stronger magnetic fields, when the quantity $`P`$ defined above becomes large, $`P1`$, it acquires the meaning of the number of returns. It should then be found self-consistently. Specifically, the sum over $`n`$ is now cut off at the time $`\tau _S^{}P\tau _S`$, since multiple returns to the same area lead to a corresponding increase of the time needed to hit a new impurity. We thus get a self-consistency equation, $`P(a/\delta )(\omega _cP\tau _S)^{1/2}`$, yielding a $`1/B^4`$ drop of the resistivity,

$$\rho _{xx}/\rho _0\tau _S/\tau _S^{}1/P(\omega _0/\omega _c)^4,\omega _c\omega _0.$$
(12)
It remains to analyze the conditions of validity of Eqs. (10), (12). First of all, we assumed that the particle finds a new scatterer by exploring the new area in the course of the diffusive motion of the guiding center. There exists, however, a competing mechanism, namely that of the rosette-like motion around a scatterer, which determines the transport in the pure Lorentz gas ($`l_L=\mathrm{}`$). Comparing (12) with the Lorentz-gas result $`\rho _{xx}/\rho _0=2\pi \gamma ^2/\omega _c\tau _S`$ \[see Eq. (1)\], we find that the two formulas match at $`\delta a`$. The corresponding crossover frequency is $`\omega _{\mathrm{cross}}=v_F(4\pi n_S^2l_S^2l_L^1)^{1/3}`$. Secondly, we assumed $`n_SR_c^21`$, or, equivalently, $`\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$. It is easy to see that in the opposite limit, $`n_SR_c^21`$, the resistivity will be determined by the smooth disorder, with scattering on antidots giving a small \[$`(\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}/\omega _c)^2`$\] correction only, so that $`\rho _{xx}(B)`$ will have a plateau with the value $`\rho _{xx}(\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{perc}})=m/e^2n_e\tau _L`$.

Comparing the characteristic frequencies, $`\omega _\tau `$, $`\omega _0`$, $`\omega _{\mathrm{cross}}`$, and $`\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$, we conclude that the following three situations can be distinguished, depending on the strength of the smooth disorder (Fig. 1):

(A) $`\omega _0\omega _\tau `$, or, equivalently, $`l_L/l_S(1/2\pi ^2)(n_Sl_S^2)^2`$. In this case the smooth disorder hardly affects the Lorentz-gas result (1).

(B) $`\omega _\tau \omega _0\omega _{\mathrm{cross}}\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$, or, equivalently, $`2.7(n_Sl_S^2)^{1/2}l_L/l_S(1/2\pi ^2)(n_Sl_S^2)^2`$. This is an intermediate situation; the resistivity drops first according to Eqs. (10), (12) and then crosses over at $`\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{cross}}`$ to the Lorentz-gas behavior (1).

(C) $`\omega _\tau \omega _0\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}\omega _{\mathrm{cross}}`$, or, equivalently, $`l_L/l_S2.7(n_Sl_S^2)^{1/2}`$. In this case the Lorentz-gas behavior (1) is completely destroyed, and the results (10), (12) hold in the whole range of $`\omega _c`$ below $`\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$.

For $`\omega _c>\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$ the resistivity shows in all the cases a plateau, as explained above. On the side of strong magnetic fields this plateau will be modified either by entering into the adiabatic regime at $`\delta d`$, meaning $`\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{ad}}=v_F(4\pi /d^2l_L)^{1/3}`$ (its implications for the present problem will be considered elsewhere ) or by the development of Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations.

It is worth mentioning that while we used the condition $`\tau _L\tau _S`$ for the derivation of our main results, a pronounced negative MR will also be observed for $`\tau _L\tau _S`$ (which seems to be frequently the relevant situation for high-mobility structures ). In this case there is a crossover from $`\rho _{xx}(0)=(m/e^2n_e)(\tau _L^1+\tau _S^1)`$ to $`\rho _{xx}(\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{perc}})=m/e^2n_e\tau _L`$ which takes place around $`\omega _c\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$ (note that $`\omega _0\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}`$ for $`\tau _L\tau _S`$).

We have performed numerical simulations of the MR by fixing parameters of the Lorentz gas ($`\omega _{\mathrm{perc}}/\omega _\tau =5.3`$) and the correlation length of the smooth disorder ($`d/a2.5`$) and changing the strength of the latter. The results shown in Fig. 2 are in good agreement with the analytical predictions. It is seen that a very weak smooth disorder (giving negligible contribution to $`\rho _0`$) affects crucially the MR. Some deviations in the values of $`\omega _0`$ from Eq. (11) (see inset) can be attributed to the fact that the conditions $`\omega _\tau \omega _0\omega _{\mathrm{perc}},\omega _{\mathrm{ad}}`$ are fulfilled only marginally in our simulations.

Finally, let us estimate the characteristic values of $`B`$ for existing experiments. Typical parameters in the experiments  on the antidot arrays were $`n_e=5\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, $`n_S=(0.6\mu \mathrm{m})^2`$, $`l_S=1.3\mu \mathrm{m}`$, $`l_L=16\mu \mathrm{m}`$. This implies the following values for the characteristic magnetic fields (we use the obvious notations $`B_\tau =(mc/e)\omega _\tau `$ etc.): $`B_\tau 0.5\mathrm{T}`$, $`B_0B_{\mathrm{perc}}0.3\mathrm{T}`$. We see that the condition of a dilute antidot array assumed above, $`B_\tau B_{\mathrm{perc}}`$, is not met. Clearly, in this situation the above analytical formulas are not valid quantitatively. On the qualitative level, we can conclude that there should be a strong fall-off of $`\rho _{xx}`$ around $`B0.3÷0.5\mathrm{T}`$, in agreement with experimental results . A similar negative MR was observed in other experiments with disordered antidot arrays .

We turn now to unstructured high-mobility samples. Using the parameters of  ($`n_e=2\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$, mobility $`\mu =10^7\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{V}\mathrm{s}`$), we find the mean free path $`l80\mu \mathrm{m}`$. Let us assume, following the conclusion of  that the zero-field mobility is determined by background impurities (i.e. $`ll_S`$), while $`l_L10l_S`$. Using the typical volume concentration of the residual impurities , $`n_S^{(3\mathrm{D})}2.5\times 10^7\mathrm{cm}^3`$, and the value of the Bohr radius in GaAs, $`a_B10\mathrm{nm}`$, we estimate the sheet density of strong scatterers as $`n_Sa_Bn_S^{(3\mathrm{D})}(2\mu \mathrm{m})^2`$. With these parameters, we find $`B_\tau 5\mathrm{mT}`$, $`B_0B_{\mathrm{perc}}60\mathrm{mT}`$. The condition of the diluted array of scatterers, $`B_\tau B_{\mathrm{perc}}`$, is now well satisfied. Since $`B_0B_{\mathrm{perc}}`$, the Lorentz-gas behavior (1) is fully destroyed (the case (C) in our classification), and the negative MR is determined by the interplay of smooth disorder and strong scatterers, as described above. Note that though parametrically $`B_0B_{\mathrm{perc}}`$ for $`l_Ll_S`$, in practice their values are very close, since $`B_0/B_{\mathrm{perc}}(10l_S/l_L)^{1/4}`$. The predicted negative MR may be used for the experimental determination of the ratio $`l_L/l_S`$. Strong negative MR has been observed in very-high-mobility samples , in qualitative agreement with our theory. A more detailed experimental check of our predictions would be desirable.

In conclusion, we have studied the quasiclassical magnetotransport of a 2DEG with smooth disorder and rare strong scatterers. Interplay of these two types of disorder leads to a novel mechanism of strong negative MR; the latter is shown to saturate with increasing $`B`$ at a value determined solely by smooth disorder. The results are relevant to experiments on transport in dilute antidot arrays, as well as in high-mobility heterostructures with background impurities or interface imperfections.

We thank M. Heiblum, J. Smet, V. Umansky, and D. Weiss for discussions of experimental results, which motivated this research. This work was supported by the SFB 195 and the Schwerpunktprogramm “Quanten-Hall-Systeme” der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft.


format: text

text:
# A MULTISECTION BROADBAND IMPEDANCE TRANSFORMING BRANCH-LINE HYBRID

## I Introduction

Branch line hybrids are extensively used in the realization of a variety of microwave circuits. Balanced mixers, data modulators, phase shifters, and power combined amplifiers are some examples of such circuits. Single section hybrids have a limited bandwidth. For example, a single section quad hybrid with equal power division has a bandwidth of about $`15\%`$ over which the power balance is within 0.5 dB. It is well known that the operating bandwidth can be greatly increased using multisection hybrids. Most applications require also that the $`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ input impedance be transformed to a higher or lower impedance. A hybrid with built-in impedance transformation is limited by the practical realizability of the line impedances of the various branches.

Although a higher bandwidth may be achieved using a coupled line configuration instead of a branch line one, coupled line hybrids are difficult to realize, particularly if microwave monolithic integrated circuits (MMIC) implementation is used. The branch line hybrid has the advantage that it may be realized using slot lines in the ground plane of a microstrip circuit. In this case the hybrid requires virtually no additional real estate on the chip. This may be an important consideration when the hybrid is part of a larger MMIC circuit. At lower microwave frequencies (5 GHz or less) a lumped element realization similar to that of  may be used to implement an MMIC hybrid.

For some applications it may be sufficient to employ a two section impedance transforming hybrid which has ideal performance at the center of the desired frequency band. Design equations for such a hybrid are derived in the next section. A general synthesis method for multisection hybrids is also reported. The hybrid is in effect a four port impedance transforming structure. Synthesis procedures for two port impedance transformers using quarter wave sections to realize a Butterworth or Chebyshev type response are well known. The synthesis method reported here, similar to that used by Levy and Lind , is applied to the hybrid with only the two port even mode circuit being synthesized. There are however, important differences from  which are brought out in the section on synthesis. This paper is organized as follows: In section II we describe and analyze the performance of the two-section broadband hybrid and in section III a general method for the synthesis of multisection hybrids is described. Section IV contains a comparative discussion between the measurements, optimization and synthesis and contains our conclusions.

## II ANALYSIS AND PERFORMANCE OF THE TWO-SECTION HYBRID

A two-section branch-line quadrature hybrid is shown in Figure 1. Using odd-even mode analysis, the even and odd mode cascade element matrices at the center frequency are given by:

$`M_e=\left[\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right]\text{}M_o=\left[\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right]`$ (5)
where:
$`A={\displaystyle \frac{b^2}{cd}}1;B=j{\displaystyle \frac{b^2}{c}};C=j({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{d}}{\displaystyle \frac{b^2}{acd}})`$
$`\text{ and }D={\displaystyle \frac{b^2}{ac}}1`$ (6)
Use of the relation between cascade parameters and the reflection and transmission coefficients  and application of matching and perfect isolation conditions ($`S_{11}=0`$ and $`S_{41}=0`$ at the center frequency) results in:

$$A=DZ_{01}/Z_{02},B=CZ_{01}Z_{02}$$
(7)
where $`Z_{01},Z_{02}`$ are input (ports 1 and 4) and output (ports 2 and 3) impedances respectively.

The normalized voltage waves $`b_2`$ and $`b_3`$ at the output ports are given in terms of the odd and even mode transmission coefficient. $`T_e\text{ and }T_o`$ by $`b_2=(T_e+T_o)/2`$ and $`b_3=(T_eT_o)/2`$. Once again using the relation between the transmission coefficients and the cascade parameters  the output port power ratio may be written as:

$$\frac{P_3}{P_2}=\frac{P_{out}\text{ at }port3}{P_{out}\text{ at }port2}=k^2$$
(8)
with:

$$k=|\frac{b_3}{b_2}|=|\frac{C}{A}Z_{01}|$$
(9)
This gives:

$$C^2=k^2A^2/Z_{01}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}$$
(10)
The negative sign was retained in (5) as equation (1) implies $`C^2`$ to be a negative quantity. A relation between the line impedances a and d is found by first solving for $`b^2/c`$ using (1), the two components of (2) and then equating the two values of $`b^2/c`$ thus found. This gives:

$$\frac{1}{a^2}=\frac{r}{d^2}+\frac{(1r)}{rZ_{01}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}$$
(11)
where $`r`$, the impedance transformation ratio is defined by the ratio $`Z_{01}/Z_{02}`$. In order to obtain design equations for the line impedances $`a,d`$ another equation relating these impedances is needed. This is obtained by applying the losslessness condition: $`|b_2|^2+|b_3|^2=1`$ along with (3):

$$|b_2|^2=1/(1+k^2)$$
(12)
Substitution for $`b_2`$ in terms of $`T_e\text{ and }T_o`$ and use of (1) and (5) result in:

$$b_2=\frac{1}{A\sqrt{r}(1+k^2)}$$
(13)
From (7) and (8):

$$A=\frac{1}{\sqrt{r(1+k^2)}}$$
(14)
The negative sign was retained in equation (9) as this solution gives non negative values of the branch impedances. Using (9) and relations between the cascade parameters and line impedances in (1) we can obtain the second equation relating $`a`$ and $`d`$ as:

$$a=d\frac{\sqrt{r(1+k^2)}1}{\sqrt{r(1+k^2)}r}$$
(15)
From  and  the line impedance $`a`$ is:

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`Z_{01}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{r(t^2r)}}{tr}}\text{ with }t\text{ defined as}`$
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`r\sqrt{1+k^2}`$ (16)
Substitution back gives:

$$d=Z_{01}\frac{\sqrt{r(t^2r)}}{t1}$$
(17)
and:

$$b^2/c=Z_{01}\sqrt{rr^2/t^2}$$
(18)
Equations (11), (12) and (13) can be used to design the two section hybrid with a given impedance transformation ratio $`r`$ and the power ratio (coupling) $`k^2`$. Note that the ratio $`b/c`$ can be chosen to be different from 1. However, $`b=c`$ gives maximum bandwidth when the best performance at the band center is specified. Impedances $`b`$ and $`c`$ are commonly chosen to be equal.

For equal power division, $`k=1`$ and $`t^2=2r^2`$. The minimum value for $`r`$ for non negative branch impedances is 0.5. In practice, $`r`$ in the range of .7 to 1.3 for a 50$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ input impedance gives practically realizable line impedances. Referring to Fig.1, the computed line impedance values of an equal power division, 50 to 35$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ two-section hybrid are: $`a=72.5\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`b=29.6\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`c=29.6\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`d=191.25\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

The computed frequency response for a 2 GHz hybrid is shown in Fig. 2. As may be seen from this figure, a 0.5dB output balance bandwidth of $`25\%`$ is feasible. However, the response can be further improved by computer optimization. In carrying out the optimization, limits were placed on the impedance values in order to yield an easily realizable design. A multisection hybrid offers the flexibility of carrying out this optimization quite effectively. The T- junction discontinuity effects can also be included in the program. Such effects become quite important at higher frequencies. Referring to Fig. 1, the optimized impedance values are: $`a=90\mathrm{\Omega },b=39\mathrm{\Omega },c=56\mathrm{\Omega },d=110\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The hybrid was fabricated on a Rogers 5880, 0.031 inch thick Duroid substrate. A wide band three section Chebyshev transformer was used at the output ports to transform the $`35\mathrm{\Omega }`$ impedance back to $`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for the measurement. The computed and measured results for $`S_{12}`$ and $`S_{13}`$ are shown in Fig.3 while the same for $`S_{11}`$ and $`S_{14}`$ are shown in Fig.4. These results show that the agreement between the measured and computed responses is quite close and a 0.5dB balance bandwidth of $`30\%`$ was realized with a built-in impedance transformation from 50 to 35$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

The computed values for a 3dB unequal power division, i.e. $`k=0.707`$, non impedance transforming hybrid are $`a=d=157\mathrm{\Omega },b=c=29\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The computed frequency response for such a hybrid is shown in Fig. 5. While the return loss and isolation values in Fig. 5 are better than 20 dB over a $`25\%`$ bandwidth, the branch line impedances are not suitable for slotline or microstrip implementation. The circuit, however, can also be improved with computer optimization. The optimized impedance values are: $`a=135\mathrm{\Omega },b=46\mathrm{\Omega },c=92\mathrm{\Omega },d=134\mathrm{\Omega }`$. These impedance values are suitable for slotline implementation. The computed frequency response for the optimized hybrid is shown in Fig. 6. As can be seen from this figure, the hybrid performance did not degrade as a result of optimization for realizable branch impedances. The branch line impedances for a 6 dB unequal power split $`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to $`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ two-section hybrid did not result in practically achievable branch line impedances for either microstrip or slotline.

The optimized branch line impedances for a 2 GHz 50$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to $`60\mathrm{\Omega }`$, 3dB unequal power division hybrid are $`a=170\mathrm{\Omega },b=47\mathrm{\Omega },c=77\mathrm{\Omega },d=151\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Fig. 7 shows the computed response of the hybrid and a 0.5dB balance bandwidth of $`30\%`$ with return loss and isolation better than 20 dB over this bandwidth.

As a result of computer optimization, substantial improvement was possible for both equal and unequal power division cases. This shows that a design for ideal performance at the band center is not adequate when maximum possible bandwidth is required. Moreover the design equations for an impedance transforming, unequal power division hybrid become quite complex as the number of sections increases beyond two. In the next section, we develop a general method that can handle multisection impedance transforming hybrids and perform the synthesis numerically. The starting point in this method is based on the analytical approach of .

## III GENERAL SYNTHESIS OF A MULTISECTION BRANCH LINE HYBRID

A general multisection branch-line hybrid is shown in Figure 8. The synthesis problem of this four-port circuit is equivalent to that of synthesizing the two-port even mode circuit. Starting from a given function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e/T_e`$ where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ is the even mode reflection coefficient of the circuit and $`T_e`$ the even mode transmission coefficient, one can extract a cascade of double-lengths unit elements (DLUE) and single length open circuited shunt stubs \[Fig.8\]. The procedure is applicable to the Butterworth as well as the Chebyshev response for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e/T_e`$.

A well-known synthesis method of two-port circuits is the Darlington method. In this method the response is specified and the losslessness condition: $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_e|^2+|T_e|^2=1`$ is used to extract $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_e|^2`$. The next step entails extraction of a complex function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ from its modulus squared. In order to do this extraction properly, the Hürwitz criterion must be respected . Once $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ is obtained, the driving point impedance of the circuit $`Z_{in}=(1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_e)/(1\mathrm{\Gamma }_e)`$ can be calculated.

The extraction of the shunt stubs and the DLUE from $`Z_{in}`$ is done sequentially. In the symmetric case ($`Z_{02}/Z_{01}=1`$) the function given by Levy et al.  and certified by Riblet  was used. However, we differ in the way we adapt the Darlington synthesis to the extraction of the individual elements. For instance, the formula used to extract the first shunt stub $`a_1`$ is:

$$a_1=\frac{1}{Z_{in}^2}(\frac{dZ_{in}}{ds})_{s=1}$$
(19)
where s is Richard’s variable. The DLUE is extracted by a sequential extraction of two single length unit elements (SLUE). A condition for the extraction of a SLUE is :

$$Z_{in}(s=1)=Z_{in}(s=1)$$
(20)
After an SLUE is extracted, the driving point impedance becomes:

$$Z_{in}^{}(s)=Z_{in}(1)[\frac{sZ_{in}(1)Z_{in}(s)}{sZ_{in}(s)Z_{in}(1)}]$$
(21)
For the sequential extraction to work it is necessary that the transformed impedance satisfies (15). Further, $`Z_{in}(1)`$ has to be equal to $`Z_{in}^{}(1)`$ for the two extracted values to be same. This is a significant variation from the method used in . Finally, the last shunt stub is extracted from a straight division of the denominator by the numerator of the last $`Z_{in}`$. In the asymmetric case, we use the function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e/T_e`$ given in  and proceed exactly as in the symmetric case. In this case $`Z_{02}/Z_{01}=r`$ where $`r1`$, the function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e/T_e`$ for an (n-1)-section hybrid is given by:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_e}{T_e}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{r}}\frac{P_{n1}(X/X_c)}{P_{n1}(1/X_c)}[(r1)jKtg(\theta )]$$
(22)
This function depends on two parameters $`X_c`$ and $`K`$ that ought to be determined from the coupling $`(|b_3|^2)`$ at the center frequency and the directivity ripple bandwidth specifications as explained below. In the Butterworth case, $`X_c=1`$ and the polynomial function $`P_{n1}(X/X_c)`$ is given by $`X^{(n1)}`$ with $`X=(1+s^2)/(1s^2)`$. Only one parameter ($`K`$) needs to be determined from the specification of a given value for the midband coupling (incidentally, the same procedure applies for specified midband power division ratio or isolation). The value of $`K`$ is numerically found as the root of the following equation:

$$[20\text{ log}_{10}(|T_eT_o|/2)|b_3|^2]_K=0$$
(23)
In the Chebyshev case, the polynomial function $`P_{n1}(X/X_c)`$ is given by :

$`P_{n1}(X/X_c)=(1+\sqrt{1X_c^2})T_{n1}(X/X_c)/2`$
$`(1\sqrt{1X_c^2})T_{n3}(X/X_c)/2`$ (24)
where $`T_n(x)`$ are the generalized Chebyshev functions defined over the entire real axis. The Chebyshev case is more complex since one has to find numerically the bandwidth parameter $`X_c`$ and the parameter $`K`$ from the roots of the following coupled equations:

$$[20\text{ log}_{10}(|T_eT_o|/2)|b_3|^2]_{K,X_c}=0$$
(25)
and:

$`[20\text{ log}_{10}\{|(T_eT_o)/(\mathrm{\Gamma }_e\mathrm{\Gamma }_o)|\}]_{K,X_c}`$
$`[20\text{ log}_{10}\{|(T_eT_o)/(\mathrm{\Gamma }_e\mathrm{\Gamma }_o)|\}]_{K,X_2}20=0`$
The reference parameter $`X_2`$ corresponds to the frequency where the directivity falls by 20dB from its value at $`X_c`$. Once the parameters $`X_c`$ and $`K`$ have been determined from the specifications, one proceeds to the determination of the $`a_i`$’s and $`b_i`$’s. We are now in a position to make detailed comparisons with the measurements and optimization as well. The first example we tackle is the wideband two section impedance transformer ($`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to $`35\mathrm{\Omega }`$) with specified zero power division at midband. Optimization and measurements are compared for this hybrid in Figs 3 and 4 while synthesis results are shown in Figs 9 and 10. We display all the S parameters for both Butterworth and Chebyshev types of response. The resulting impedance values in the Chebyshev case are: $`a_1=157.50\mathrm{\Omega },a_2=85.05\mathrm{\Omega },a_3=99.88\mathrm{\Omega },b_1=39.49\mathrm{\Omega },b_2=33.49\mathrm{\Omega }`$. When the specified type of response is Chebyshev, while a good isolation is obtained at midband (-20 dB), a zero power division ratio could not be obtained. This happens if a wide band, good isolation and impedance transformation ratio of 0.7 are simultaneously required. The actual power division ratio obtained is around -5 dB. When any of these conditions is relaxed the required solution exists and is shown in Fig. 10 for the Butterworth case and in Fig. 11 for the modified Chebyshev case as explained below.

The modified Chebyshev approach consists of calculating the parameters $`K`$ and $`X_c`$ by first assuming $`r=1`$. Once the $`a_i`$’s and $`b_i`$’s are obtained, the S parameters with the actual value of $`r`$ are calculated. The frequency response is displayed in Fig. 11. The required power division ratio (almost 0 dB) as well as good isolation (around -22.5 dB) were obtained. Experimental verification of the synthesized design was done by fabricating a microstrip hybrid on a 0.031 inch thick Duroid substrate. The measured responses displayed in Fig.11 indicate a very close agreement with the synthesis. The second example of Chebyshev type is the wide band two section impedance transformer ($`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to 60 $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$) with specified - 3dB power division at midband. This hybrid was optimized and the results were presented in Fig.7. In Fig. 12, all the S parameters for the Chebyshev synthesized hybrid are presented. In this case, the resulting impedance values are: $`a_1=161.31\mathrm{\Omega },a_2=55.37\mathrm{\Omega },a_3=125.94\mathrm{\Omega },b_1=39.96\mathrm{\Omega },b_2=36.28\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The power division ratio was obtained from the synthesis as required (-3 dB) but a poor isolation (-15 dB) at midband was found. In contrast, the Butterworth synthesis is shown in Fig. 13. Synthesis was also done with the modified Chebyshev method mentioned above and the results are shown in Fig. 14. As may be seen, this modified method resulted in quite a reasonable response with an isolation better than 20dB.

## IV CONCLUSIONS

Design equations for a two section impedance transforming quad hybrid were derived. Using these equations a two section branch line hybrid can be designed to achieve a percentage bandwidth of $`30\%`$ with impedance transformation by a factor of .7 to 1.3. Over this bandwidth the power balance between the output ports is measured better than 0.5 dB. A two section branch line hybrid with 3dB unequal power division also has a $`30\%`$ bandwidth but the impedance transformation ratio range drops to \[0.833 - 1.2\]. A slotline/lumped implementation of such a hybrid is attractive for MMIC circuits. In addition, a new general synthesis method for a multisection hybrid with Butterworth or Chebyshev response is described. Both symmetric (with equal input and output impedances) and non-symmetric (impedance transforming) designs were demonstrated. A close agreement between the synthesized, optimized and measured results were obtained.

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank G. Wells for assistance in fabrication and testing and P. Pramanick for many stimulating discussions. Financial support for this work was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada under a university industry chair program.


text:
# PMN J1632–0033: A new gravitationally lensed quasar

## 1 Introduction

When a galaxy happens to lie along nearly the same line of sight as a more distant object, gravitational lensing may cause multiple images of the background object to appear in the sky. These cases of “strong” lensing (as opposed to “weak” lensing, in which images of background objects are distorted but not multiply imaged) can be used to measure the masses (see, e.g., Kochanek 1995), evolution (Kochanek et al. 2000) and extinction laws (Falco et al. 1999) of distant galaxies, and to determine the Hubble constant (Refsdal, 1964; Koopmans & Fassnacht, 1999) and cosmological constant (Turner, 1990; Fukugita, Futamase & Kasai, 1990; Falco et al., 1998), among other applications (for reviews, see Narayan, 1998; Blandford & Narayan, 1992).

We have been conducting a survey for new lenses to be used in these applications. Ours is the latest in a series of VLA-based surveys for gravitational lenses (Lawrence et al., 1986; King et al., 1998; Browne & Myers, 2000), and is the first to explore the portion of the southern sky accessible to the VLA ($`0\mathrm{°}>\delta >40\mathrm{°}`$).

The search strategy relies on the fact that the great majority ($`95\%`$) of flat-spectrum radio sources appear as point sources in 8.5 GHz VLA A-array images (which have $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$ resolution). Our initial sample of 4097 flat-spectrum radio sources was generated by cross-correlating the PMN (4.85 GHz; Griffith & Wright 1993) and NVSS (1.4 GHz; Condon et al. 1998) catalogs. Those few sources exhibiting multiple compact components in 8.5 GHz VLA images, with separations ranging from $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$ to $`6\mathrm{}`$, were selected as lens candidates. To filter out core-jet sources, the candidates underwent radio imaging with higher angular resolution. The very best candidates were then observed with optical telescopes, in order to search for a lens galaxy.

The object presented in this paper, J1632–0033, is the fourth confirmed lens to date. Section 2 presents the radio observations. Section 3 presents optical data, from Hubble Space Telescope imaging (§ 3.1), ground-based direct imaging (§ 3.2) and spectroscopy (§ 3.3). Simple gravitational lens models are discussed in § 4. The nature of the third faint radio component is also taken up in this section, along with possible implications for the mass distribution of the lens galaxy if the third component is an additional quasar image. Finally, § 5 summarizes the evidence that J1632–0033 is a gravitationally lensed quasar, and describes prospects for future observations that would use the system as a probe of cosmology or galactic structure.

## 2 Radio observations—overview

Table 1 lists the radio observations with the VLA, VLBA111The Very Large Array (VLA) and Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) are operated by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory, a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc., MERLIN222The Multi-Element Radio Linked Interferometry Network (MERLIN) is a UK national facility operated by the University of Manchester on behalf of SERC., and ATCA333The Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) is part of the Australia Telescope which is funded by the Commonwealth of Australia for operation as a National Facility managed by CSIRO. in chronological order. The first 3 entries represent archival VLA data that we obtained and reduced; the remaining 10 are observations that we conducted after identifying J1632–0033 as a gravitational lens candidate.

In all the images except the VLBA image and the second (deeper) MERLIN image, there are two components separated by $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}47`$. We refer to the northwest (brighter) component as A, and the southeast (dimmer) component as B.

The deeper MERLIN image revealed a faint third component at the $`6.7\sigma `$ level (where $`\sigma `$ is the RMS noise in a nearby blank area of the radio image). It is located close to B and nearly along the line between A and B. This component is also present at the $`4.5\sigma `$ level in the VLBA image, although we noticed it only after seeing it in the MERLIN image. We refer to this faint component as C. Component C was not detected in any of the other images, nor would it be expected to be detectable in those images, given their lower angular resolution and/or higher noise level.

Components A and B are unresolved in all the images except the VLBA image, in which component A is partially resolved. Component C is too faint to determine whether it is unresolved or slightly resolved with much confidence. Figure 1 displays a representative VLA image of the system, the deeper MERLIN image, and higher-resolution VLBA images of components A and B. Table 2 gives the relative positions of A, B, and C, as determined from the VLBA image. The J2000 coordinates of J1632–0033, as derived from the VLA observations, are also given in Table 2.

### 2.1 Data reduction and analysis

The details of the data reduction and analysis were as follows:

VLA: The VLA data were calibrated with standard routines in the software package AIPS. For the first three VLA observations (1984–1999), radio source 3C286 was used to set the absolute flux density scale, using the procedures recommended in the VLA Calibrator Manual. For the VLA observations in 2000, the source J2355+4950 was used instead; this compact source is monitored monthly by G. Taylor and S. Myers of NRAO, and has been found to have a stable flux density. The assumed flux densities of J2355+4950 were 2.306 Jy (1.4 GHz), 0.602 Jy (15 GHz), 0.473 Jy (22.5 GHz), and 0.284 Jy (43 GHz). We applied gain-elevation corrections for data at 15 GHz and higher frequencies based on gain curves prepared by NRAO staff.

Imaging and analysis were performed with the software package Difmap (Shepherd, Pearson, & Taylor, 1994). We fitted a surface-brightness model consisting of 2 unresolved points to the visibility function, and used this model to perform phase-only self-calibration with a solution interval of 30 seconds. This process, model-fitting and self-calibration, was repeated (typically 3 times) until the model converged. For the 1.4 GHz data, which had the lowest spatial resolution, we fixed the relative separation and orientation of the model components at the values obtained from the VLBA data.

ATCA: The ATCA data were calibrated using the software package MIRIAD (Sault, Teuben, & Wright, 1995). The absolute flux density scale of the ATCA data was set by observations of PKS B1934–638. The imaging and analysis steps were the same as for the VLA data. As with the 1.4 GHz VLA data, the relative separation of the two model components was kept fixed at the values derived from the VLBA data, in order to improve the accuracy with which we could extract separate flux densities for A and B.

MERLIN: Calibration of the MERLIN data was performed at Jodrell Bank using both standard MERLIN software and AIPS. The absolute flux scale was set by observing 3C286 and assuming a flux density of 7.38 Jy on the shortest baseline. Imaging and analysis were performed with Difmap in the same manner as for the VLA and ATCA data. For the second, much longer MERLIN observation, we also performed one round of amplitude self-calibration, with a solution interval of 30 minutes. In that case the residuals (after the two-component model was subtracted) indicated the presence of a third component. Our final model consisted of three point sources (A, B, and C).

VLBA: For the VLBA observation, the total observing bandwidth was divided into 4 intermediate frequency bands, each of which was subdivided into $`16\times 0.5`$ MHz channels. Fringe-fitting, calibration, and imaging of the VLBA data were all performed with AIPS. After fringe-fitting, we reduced the data volume by averaging in time into 6-second bins and in frequency into 1 MHz bins. These values were chosen to reduce the data volume as much as possible while keeping the amount of bandwidth smearing and time-average smearing below $`1\%`$ over the required field of view.

Components A and B were obvious in the “dirty” image (prior to deconvolution). We employed the multiple-field implementation of the CLEAN algorithm, with a 180 mas $`\times `$ 180 mas field centered on each component. The model developed by the CLEAN algorithm was used to self-calibrate the antenna phases with a solution interval of 30 seconds. We iterated this process 5 times before arriving at the final model. The images based on this model, with uniform weighting and an elliptical Gaussian restoring beam, are displayed in Figure 1.

After seeing component C in the MERLIN image, we repeated the imaging step using two 200 mas $`\times `$ 200 mas fields, one centered on component A, and the other centered between B and the expected location of C. We found a $`4.5\sigma `$ peak within 5 mas of the MERLIN position of C. It is the brightest peak within the field, and does not belong to the sidelobe pattern of either of the two brighter components A or B. We conclude that component C is also present in the VLBA image.

### 2.2 Radio observations—discussion

The flux densities of A, B, and C (when detected) are reported in Table 1 for each observation, along with the RMS noise level and an estimate of the uncertainty in the absolute flux scale. These numbers were used to generate the two plots presented in Figure 2.

The top panel of Figure 2 is a logarithmic plot of the total flux density of both components as a function of radio frequency. Evidently J1632–0033 has a fairly flat radio spectrum, typical of radio-loud quasars (and indeed, the optical spectrum presented in § 3.3 verifies that it is a quasar). From 5 GHz to 22.5 GHz, the data that were all taken in the year 2000 are a good match to the power law $`S_\nu \nu ^{0.3}`$. At 8.5 GHz, there is evidence for variability at the 5–10% level on a time scale of years. (The discrepancies between the 5 GHz measurements are more difficult to interpret, because the VLBA and MERLIN probe much smaller angular scales than the other 5 GHz observations.)

Two compact, flat-spectrum radio components separated by $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}47`$ are likely to be either a pair of quasars at the same redshift (a binary quasar) or a pair of gravitationally lensed images of a single quasar. In fact, J1632–0033 is a lens rather than a binary quasar. The most definitive evidence, optical detection of the lens galaxy, is presented in the next section. But, interestingly, lensing is implicated by the radio evidence alone.

The first clue is the near-equality of spectral indices of components A and B. This is a natural consequence of gravitational lensing, which is achromatic, but would require a coincidence under the binary quasar hypothesis. The bottom panel of Figure 2 is a logarithmic plot of the A/B flux density ratio as a function of frequency. The ratio increases by less than 30% over a factor of 30 in frequency (and even this may be due in part to components B and C being lumped together in the low-resolution images—see § 4.2). Assuming that component A obeys $`S_\nu (A)\nu ^\alpha `$, and likewise $`S_\nu (B)\nu ^\beta `$, then a least-squares analysis implies $`\alpha \beta =0.07\pm 0.01`$. We estimate the probability of randomly drawing two quasars with spectral indices that match as closely to be 7%, by analyzing the histogram of spectral indices of flat-spectrum sources in the PMN tropical and equatorial catalogs.

The second piece of radio evidence, which is more compelling, is the location of the faint component C. It is located almost exactly where one would expect to find the center of a lens galaxy—along the line joining A and B, and closer to the dimmer of the two components, as simple lens models predict (see § 4.1). Regardless of whether C is emission from the lens galaxy or a third, demagnified image of the background quasar (see § 4.2), the existence and location of C implies that the system is a lens rather than a binary quasar.

## 3 Optical observations

### 3.1 HST images

On 2001 July 1 we obtained optical images of J1632–0033 with the WFPC2 camera aboard the HST444 Data from the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope (HST) were obtained from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-26555.. We obtained 3 dithered exposures through each of two filters, F555W ($`V`$) and F814W ($`I`$). The total exposure time for each filter was 2000 seconds. The target was centered in the PC chip.

The exposures were combined and cosmic rays rejected using the Drizzle algorithm as implemented in IRAF555 The Image Reduction and Analysis Facility (IRAF) is a software package developed and distributed by the National Optical Astronomical Observatories, which is operated by AURA under a cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.. In both filters, light from a bright ($`R=11`$) binary star $`30\mathrm{}`$ to the south of J1632–0033 caused a large gradient in the background level across the PC chip, which was removed by fitting (and then subtracting) a second-order polynomial surface to the apparently empty regions of the image. The upper two panels of Figure 3 show the final images.

In the $`V`$-band image, the optical counterparts to radio components A and B were detected, and are unresolved. In the $`I`$-band image, A and B are also present, but there is a diffuse object near B that we identify as the lens galaxy. We constructed a photometric model for each image using software written by B. McLeod (see, e.g., Lehár et al. 2000). This program finds the parameters of a surface-brightness model (which consists of a user-determined number of point sources and simple galaxy profiles) convolved with a PSF computed by the program “Tiny Tim” (Krist & Hook, 1997), such that the mean-square residuals are minimized.

For the $`I`$-band image, we tried initially to fit a model consisting of 2 point sources only. Subtracting two point sources from the $`I`$-band image leaves behind residuals near A with peak intensity $`3\%`$ the central intensity of A, which in our experience is the level produced by inaccuracies in the Tiny Tim PSF. However, the residuals near B have peak values 40% the central intensity of B and $`8\sigma `$, where $`\sigma `$ is the RMS level in a blank region of the image. This indicates there is a diffuse source of unmodeled light near B: the lens galaxy.

Our final model consisted of two points and a circular de Vaucouleurs profile. Upon subtraction of this model, the residuals near B are consistent with random noise. In order to highlight the galaxy, the lower right panel of Figure 3 shows the image that results when only the point sources of the best-fit model have been subtracted. Table 3 lists the parameters of the best-fit photometric model.

As mentioned earlier, the position of the center of the galaxy derived from the HST image is consistent with the location of radio component C, and both are located where simple lens models predict that a lens galaxy (or demagnified third image) to appear. However, because it is not clear whether the galaxy itself is responsible for the radio emission, we have labeled the optical galaxy G rather than C.

For the $`V`$-band image, our model consisted of two point sources. The residuals (after the best-fit model was subtracted from the original image) are shown in the lower left panel. The peak residuals near A are 3–5% of the central intensity of A. The peak residuals near B are dominated by noise rather than PSF subtraction; they are $`3\sigma `$ where $`\sigma `$ is the RMS level in a blank region of the image. The separation and position angle of the points are consistent with the A/B radio values.

For the final $`V`$-band results listed in Table 3, we also added a de Vaucouleurs profile to the model, but we fixed its effective radius and fixed all the positions of the model components at the $`I`$-band values, and allowed only their fluxes to vary. Because the $`V`$-band image does not provide independent evidence for the galaxy, the $`V`$-band galaxy magnitude should probably be considered as an approximate lower limit.

The zero-points of the magnitude scales were 21.69 for $`I`$ and 22.54 for $`V`$, as determined by Dolphin (2000) and corrected for infinite aperture. We also applied a correction for losses due to the charge-transfer-efficiency problem of WFPC2, as per the prescription of Dolphin (2000). These corrections were large: for component A they were $`+0.20`$ mag for both filters, and for components B+G they were $`+0.50`$ for $`I`$ and $`+0.90`$ for $`V`$. The quoted magnitudes are therefore considerably uncertain and should be treated with caution.

### 3.2 Ground-based images

Before obtaining the HST image we attempted to search for evidence of a lens galaxy in ground-based optical images. Although the HST image contains the most convincing evidence of the lens galaxy, the ground-based results are useful in providing total magnitudes and flux ratios over a wider range of wavelengths.

On 2000 July 25 we obtained $`BVRI`$ optical images of J1632–0033 with the Mosaic II camera on the prime focus of the Blanco 4-meter telescope at CTIO666 Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory (CTIO) is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy Inc., under a cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation as part of the National Optical Astronomy Observatories.. The night was photometric. Each exposure lasted 600 seconds. After extracting the images from chip #2, we corrected them for cross-talk from the paired amplifier, bias-subtracted and flat-fielded them with standard IRAF procedures, and defringed the $`I`$-band images using a fringe template kindly supplied by R.C. Dohm-Palmer.

The seeing was $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}2`$. The object could barely be resolved in the $`I`$-band image but appeared pointlike in the other images. A synthetic circular aperture of radius $`7\mathrm{}`$ was used to compute total instrumental magnitudes (after subtracting all neighboring objects within $`14\mathrm{}`$). To place the instrumental magnitudes on a standard photometric system, we also observed the standard stars #355, #360, and #361 from field SA110 described by Landolt (1992). Our photometric solutions took the form:

$$m_{\text{std}}=m_{\text{inst}}+c_1+c_2(B_{\text{inst}}R_{\text{inst}}),$$
(1)
where

$$m_{\text{inst}}=2.5\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\text{counts}}{\text{time}}\right)k_m\times \text{airmass}.$$
(2)
We adopted “typical” CTIO coefficients of $`k_I=0.06`$, $`k_R=0.11`$, $`k_V=0.15`$, and $`k_B=0.28`$ (Landolt, 1992). Star #355 was not used for the $`I`$-band solution because it was overexposed. Table 4 reports the calibrated magnitudes of J1632–0033. The $`I`$-band magnitude disagrees with the F814W magnitude reported in § 3.1, possibly due to the CTE problem of WFPC2.

On 25–26 March 2001 we obtained optical images of J1632–0033 with MagIC, a CCD camera at the Nasmyth focus of the 6.5-meter Baade telescope.777The 6.5-meter Baade telescope is the first telescope of the Magellan Project, a collaboration between Carnegie Observatories, the University of Arizona, Harvard University, the University of Michigan, and MIT. We obtained 480-second exposures in each of the Sloan filters $`g^{}`$, $`r^{}`$, and $`i^{}`$ in $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}8`$ seeing. On 11–12 June 2001 we also obtained an additional three $`i^{}`$ exposures totaling 1350 seconds, in $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6`$ seeing.

The optical counterpart of J1632–0033 appeared double in all images. In particular, in the $`i^{}`$-images from June, the southeast component was slightly resolved rather than pointlike, as would be expected from a combination of quasar B and the lens galaxy.

For each filter, we estimated the flux ratio A:(B+G) using the following procedure. With the DAOPHOT package in IRAF, we constructed an empirical PSF of radius $`3\mathrm{}`$, using the signal-weighted average of several bright and isolated field stars. We then fit a model consisting of two point sources to the optical counterpart of J1632–0033. The results for the flux ratio are printed in Table 5.

The ratio decreases with wavelength for two reasons. First, G is redder than the quasar images, as demonstrated by the analysis of the HST images in § 3.1. Second, the reddening of the quasar light due to passage through the lens galaxy is apparently larger for image B than for image A. This follows from the observation that the flux ratios in the $`g^{}`$ and $`V`$-band images (which do not contain a significant contribution from lens galaxy light) are larger than the radio value. This is reasonable, since B is considerably closer to the galaxy center than A.

### 3.3 Optical spectrum

On 2000 September 1, we obtained an optical spectrum of J1632–0033 with the 3.5-meter telescope at Apache Point Observatory888The Apache Point Observatory 3.5-meter telescope is owned and operated by the Astrophysical Research Consortium.. We used the Double Imaging Spectrograph in low resolution mode. The processed spectrum had a very weak signal, with two features at the $`12\sigma `$ level whose wavelength ratio was consistent with the common quasar emission lines Ly$`\alpha `$ (1216Å) and C IV (1549Å), allowing the tentative identification of J1632–0033 as a quasar at redshift 3.42.

This identification was confirmed on 2001 March 23, when we obtained an optical spectrum with the 6.5-meter Baade telescope. We used a Boller & Chivens slit spectrograph with a 600 lines mm-1 grating, giving a pixel scale of $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}44`$ pixel-1, dispersion 2.75Å pixel-1, resolution $`10`$Å, and wavelength coverage 4500–7300Å. We used the WG360 Schott glass blocking filter to block second order contamination. The slit was $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$ wide, centered on component A, and oriented perpendicular to the A/B position angle.

Flat-fielding, spectrum extraction, and wavelength calibration were carried out with standard IRAF procedures. The processed spectrum is shown in Figure 4. Here the Ly$`\alpha `$ and C IV emission lines are detected with high significance, implying $`z=3.424\pm 0.007`$. The expected position of Si IV + O IV\] (1400Å) is also shown.

As for the lens galaxy, its redshift is currently unknown, but it is possible to estimate photometrically. Kochanek et al. (2000) devised a method to estimate the redshift of a lens galaxy, given the redshift of the background source, the image separation, and the magnitudes and effective radius of the galaxy. The idea is to require that the galaxy properties are consistent with the passively-evolving fundamental plane (FP) of early-type galaxies. In this case the FP estimate of the lens redshift is $`z=1.0\pm 0.1`$.

## 4 Gravitational lens models

### 4.1 Simple two-image models

Constructing a model of the gravitational potential of the lens galaxy is important for three reasons. First, if the model is physically plausible, it corroborates our claim that J1632–0033 is truly a lens. Second, a lens model is required to predict the time delay between lensed images as a function of the Hubble constant. Third, if enough constraints are available, the lens model may reveal interesting aspects of the matter distribution of the lens galaxy, including dark matter.

The present observations of J1632–0033 provide five constraints on models of the lens potential: the positions of A and B with respect to the lens center, and the A/B radio flux density ratio. The relative separation of A and B is known precisely from the VLBA image. Because the position of radio component C is consistent with the optical lens galaxy G, we assume that C marks the lens center, although we enlarge the uncertainty to 10 mas to allow for the possibility of a small displacement between the lens center and the radio component. Our measurements of the radio flux density ratio have a mean of 13.2, and a scatter of 15%.

The simplest plausible lens model is a singular isothermal sphere, which produces two images on opposite sides of the lens, with a magnification ratio equal to the ratio of distances from each image to the lens center. As stated earlier in §§ 2.2 and 3.1, the present data are nearly consistent with this model. Component C lies only 7 mas from the line joining A and B, and the ratio of distances is $`13.8\pm 0.8`$, in agreement with the flux density ratio.

This confirms that gravitational lensing is a natural explanation for the morphology of J1632–0033. Unfortunately there are not enough constraints to explore less idealized lens models in detail. A singular isothermal ellipsoid (SIE), for example, has five parameters (the position of the lens, the mass scale, the ellipticity and the position angle), and is therefore uniquely determined by our five constraints. Table 6 gives the parameters of the SIE model, as computed with lens modeling software written by Keeton (2001). The quoted uncertainties reflect the variations in the parameters obtained by varying the position of the lens center and the magnification ratio throughout their quoted error ranges.

The final quantity listed in Table 6, labeled $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$, is a dimensionless factor that may be converted into a time delay $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ by assuming a lens redshift and a cosmological model as follows:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\frac{D_lD_s}{2cD_{ls}}(1+z_l)\mathrm{\Delta }\tau .$$
(3)
In this equation, $`z_l`$ is the lens redshift, and $`D_l`$, $`D_s`$ and $`D_{ls}`$ are the angular-diameter distances to the lens, to the source, and between the lens and source, respectively.

If we assume $`z_l=1.0\pm 0.1`$, as predicted by the FP method (see § 3.3), then in a cosmology in which matter is distributed smoothly with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$, the result is $`h\mathrm{\Delta }t=118.5\pm 1.9`$ days, where $`H_0=100h`$ km s-1 Mpc-1 as usual. If instead $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, then $`h\mathrm{\Delta }t=125.7\pm 2.0`$ days. Image A is expected to lead image B. The uncertainties quoted here are internal to the SIE model only; the true uncertainty in the time delay is much larger.

### 4.2 The nature of component C

We now return to the question of the origin of C, the third and faintest radio component. Its position relative to A and B agrees with that of the galaxy G detected in the $`I`$-band HST image (§ 3.1), so it possibly represents emission from a faint AGN in the lens galaxy. In this section we consider the implications of another possibility—that C represents a third quasar image.

Although the SIS and SIE models only predict two images of the background source, many lens models predict the existence of a third image of the quasar located close to the lens center that is demagnified by an amount depending on the central surface density of the lens galaxy (see, e.g., Narasimha, Subramanian, & Chitre 1986). The existence or absence of the “odd image” can therefore provide information on the central structure of the lens galaxy, which would otherwise be very difficult to obtain for a galaxy at $`z1`$. The only lens for which an odd image has been identified confidently is APM 08279+5255 (Ibata et al., 1999; Egami et al., 2000). Many of the current observations of radio lenses, which have typical dynamic ranges of 100–1000, show no evidence for odd images; presumably the absence of the odd images is due to the high central surface densities of the lens galaxies (Wallington & Narayan, 1993; Rusin & Ma, 2001; Keeton, 2001b).

There are two simple extensions of singular isothermal lens models that produce three images. In the first category are models with a finite core radius $`r_c`$. In these models, the magnification of the odd image is approximately $`(\theta _c/\theta _E)^2`$, where $`\theta _E`$ is the Einstein ring radius of the lens galaxy (approximately half the image separation), and $`\theta _c=D_lr_c`$, the angle subtended by the core radius. In our SIE model for J1632–0033, if C is an odd image then its magnification is $`(111\pm 37)^1`$, implying $`(\theta _c/\theta _E)=0.095\pm 0.016`$. For $`z_l=1`$ this corresponds to a core radius of $`590\pm 100`$ parsecs. A core radius this large would be interesting, because one would expect much smaller (or zero) core radii based on the cusped distribution of starlight in HST images of nearby galaxies (Faber et al., 1997), the absence of odd images of most other lensed quasars (Wallington & Narayan, 1993; Rusin & Ma, 2001; Keeton, 2001b), and theoretical simulations of cold-dark-matter haloes (Navarro, Frenk, & White, 1996).

For exactly these reasons, several authors have recently emphasized a second category of lens models, which have a central density cusp (see, e.g., Evans & Wilkinson, 1998; Keeton, 2001b; Muñoz, Kochanek, & Keeton, 2001). If the cusp in the three-dimensional mass density obeys the power law $`\rho r^\gamma `$ for small $`r`$, then a third image is produced for $`\gamma <2`$. These models have even more trouble accomodating C as an odd image. For example, Muñoz, Kochanek, & Keeton (2001) applied a cusped lens model to the 3-image lens APM 08279+5255, and found that, in order to match the observational constraints, the cusp exponent had to be so shallow as to approach the limit of models with a finite core radius.

In short, if C is a third quasar image, then the mass distribution of the inner few hundred parsecs of the lens galaxy in J1632–0033 is not as centrally condensed as one would expect from studies of nearby galaxies, studies of other lenses, and theoretical models of halo formation. It would therefore be interesting to test definitively whether C is galaxy emission or a third quasar image.

Probably the simplest approach would be to measure the radio continuum spectrum of C over as broad a wavelength range as possible. If C is a third image, its spectrum should match that of A and B. There is one indication in the present data that C may have a steeper spectrum than that of A and B: the trend of increasing flux density ratio with radio frequency that is depicted in the bottom panel of Figure 2. The VLA data below 22.5 GHz do not have sufficient angular resolution to distinguish B and C, so their flux densities are lumped together in the models. A steeper spectrum for C would therefore cause the inferred flux density ratio to decrease with frequency. For example, if the true A/B flux density ratio is 14.7 (as implied by the April 2001 MERLIN data) and independent of frequency, then in order to lower the flux density ratio to match the 1.4 GHz data, the required spectral index of C is $`\alpha =1.3`$.

Unfortunately there are other reasons to expect that the measured flux density ratio A/B is not completely independent of frequency, such as variability (coupled with the time delay), and the possibility of a large magnification gradient across a source with frequency-dependent substructure. It would be preferable to obtain multi-wavelength radio images with sufficient angular resolution and sensitivity to resolve all three components.

## 5 Summary and future prospects

Radio source J1632–0033 is the fourth confirmed gravitational lens in our survey of the southern sky for new lenses. Here we briefly review the evidence for lensing and the immediate prospects for using this lens to obtain interesting astrophysical information. Two compact, flat-spectrum radio components separated by $`1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}47`$ are almost certainly either a binary quasar or a pair of lensed images of a single quasar. The flux density ratio is within 15% of 13.2 as measured from 1.4 GHz to 43 GHz; this similarity of radio spectra favors the lens hypothesis. The lens galaxy is apparent in an optical image with HST, and it is located exactly where one would expect, based on the simplest plausible lens model.

The background source is a spectroscopically verified quasar at redshift 3.42. The optical magnitude, color, and effective radius of the lens galaxy (together with the mass estimate provided by the image separation) are consistent with a passively-evolving elliptical galaxy at redshift unity. There is a faint third radio component located at or near the center of the lens galaxy, which is either faint emission from the galaxy itself, or a third quasar image. In the latter case, the study of the faint component may be useful as a probe of the central few hundred parsecs of a $`z1`$ galaxy.

The flat radio spectrum, and mild variability observed at 8.5 GHz, make this system a candidate for flux monitoring, in order to use the time delay between the quasar images to determine the Hubble constant. The present data, however, do not provide nearly enough model constraints for this method to be competitive with local distance-scale methods. One would need an additional, rich body of constraints, possibly from infrared imaging of the quasar host galaxy (see, e.g. Kochanek, Keeton, & McLeod, 2001) or VLBI substructure (see, e.g., Trotter, Winn & Hewitt, 2000).

We are grateful to David Rusin, for a critical reading of an early version of this report; Brian McLeod, for help with HST image decomposition; Chuck Keeton, for making his lens modeling code publicly available; Ed Turner, for arranging APO spectroscopic observations; Phillip Helbig, for releasing archival VLA data; Chris Fassnacht, for assistance with the VLBA; and Tom Muxlow and Peter Thomasson, for their help with MERLIN. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation under grants AST-9617028 and AST-9616866. J.N.W. thanks the Fannie and John Hertz foundation for financial support.