Cosmological weak lensing measurements rely on a precise measurement of the shear two-point correlation function (2PCF) along with a deep understanding of systematics that affect it. In this work, we demonstrate a general framework for detecting and modelling the impact of PSF systematics on the cosmic shear 2PCF and mitigating its impact on cosmological analysis. Our framework can detect PSF leakage and modelling error from all spin-2 quantities contributed by the PSF second and higher moments, rather than just the second moments, using the cross-correlations between galaxy shapes and PSF moments. We interpret null tests using the HSC Year 3 (Y3) catalogs with this formalism and find that leakage from the spin-2 combination of PSF fourth moments is the leading contributor to additive shear systematics, with total contamination that is an order-of-magnitude higher than that contributed by PSF second moments alone. We conducted a mock cosmic shear analysis for HSC Y3 and find that, if uncorrected, PSF systematics can bias the cosmological parameters Ωm and S8 by ∼0.3σ. The traditional second moment-based model can only correct for a 0.1σ bias, leaving the contamination largely uncorrected. We conclude it is necessary to model both PSF second and fourth moment contaminations for HSC Y3 cosmic shear analysis. We also reanalyse the HSC Y1 cosmic shear analysis with our updated systematics model and identify a 0.07σ bias on Ωm when using the more restricted second moment model from the original analysis. We demonstrate how to self-consistently use the method in both real space and Fourier space, assess shear systematics in tomographic bins, and test for PSF model overfitting.
Weak gravitational lensing is one of the most powerful tools for cosmology, while subject to challenges in quantifying subtle systematic biases. The point spread function (PSF) can cause biases in weak lensing shear inference when the PSF model does not match the true PSF that is convolved with the galaxy light profile. Although the effect of PSF size and shape errors – i.e. errors in second moments – is well studied, weak lensing systematics associated with errors in higher moments of the PSF model require further investigation. The goal of our study is to estimate their potential impact for LSST weak lensing analysis. We go beyond second moments of the PSF by using image simulations to relate multiplicative bias in shear to errors in the higher moments of the PSF model. We find that the current level of errors in higher moments of the PSF model in data from the Hyper Suprime-Cam survey can induce a ∼0.05 per cent shear bias, making this effect unimportant for ongoing surveys but relevant at the precision of upcoming surveys such as LSST.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10361115
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Volume:
- 510
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 0035-8711
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 1978-1993
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT -
more » « less
ABSTRACT Recent works have shown that weak lensing magnification must be included in upcoming large-scale structure analyses, such as for the Vera C. Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST), to avoid biasing the cosmological results. In this work, we investigate whether including magnification has a positive impact on the precision of the cosmological constraints, as well as being necessary to avoid bias. We forecast this using an LSST mock catalogue and a halo model to calculate the galaxy power spectra. We find that including magnification has little effect on the precision of the cosmological parameter constraints for an LSST galaxy clustering analysis, where the halo model parameters are additionally constrained by the galaxy luminosity function. In particular, we find that for the LSST gold sample (i < 25.3) including weak lensing magnification only improves the galaxy clustering constraint on Ωm by a factor of 1.03, and when using a very deep LSST mock sample (i < 26.5) by a factor of 1.3. Since magnification predominantly contributes to the clustering measurement and provides similar information to that of cosmic shear, this improvement would be reduced for a combined galaxy clustering and shear analysis. We also confirm that not modelling weak lensing magnification will catastrophically bias the cosmological results from LSST. Magnification must therefore be included in LSST large-scale structure analyses even though it does not significantly enhance the precision of the cosmological constraints.
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT In addition to the intrinsic clustering of galaxies themselves, the spatial distribution of galaxies observed in surveys is modulated by the presence of weak lensing due to matter in the foreground. This effect, known as magnification bias, is a significant contaminant to analyses of galaxy-lensing cross-correlations and must be carefully modelled. We present a method to estimate the magnification bias in spectroscopically confirmed galaxy samples based on finite differences of galaxy catalogues while marginalizing over errors due to finite step size. We use our estimator to measure the magnification biases of the CMASS and LOWZ samples in the SDSS BOSS galaxy survey, analytically taking into account the dependence on galaxy shape for fibre and PSF magnitudes, finding αCMASS = 2.71 ± 0.02 and αLOWZ = 2.45 ± 0.02 and quantify modelling uncertainties in these measurements. Finally, we quantify the redshift evolution of the magnification bias within the CMASS and LOWZ samples, finding a difference of up to a factor of three between the lower and upper redshift bounds for the former. We discuss how to account for this evolution in modelling and its interaction with commonly applied redshift-dependent weights. Our method should be readily applicable to upcoming surveys and we make our code publicly available as part of this work.
-
In cosmological analyses it is common to combine different types of measurement from the same survey. In this paper we use simulated DES Y3 and LSST Y1 data to explore differences in sensitivity to intrinsic alignments (IA) between cosmic shear and galaxy-galaxy lensing. We generate mock shear, galaxy-galaxy lensing and galaxy clustering data, contaminated with a range of IA scenarios. Using a simple 2-parameter IA model (NLA) in a DES Y3 like analysis, we show that the galaxy-galaxy lensing + galaxy clustering combination (2x2pt) is significantly more robust to IA mismodelling than cosmic shear. IA scenarios that produce up to 5sigma biases for shear are seen to be unbiased at the level of 1sigma for 2x2pt. We demonstrate that this robustness can be largely attributed to the redshift separation in galaxy-galaxy lensing, which provides a cleaner separation of lensing and IA contributions. We identify secondary factors which may also contribute, including the possibility of cancellation of higher-order IA terms in 2x2pt and differences in sensitivity to physical scales. Unfortunately this does not typically correspond to equally effective self-calibration in a 3x2pt analysis of the same data, which can show significant biases driven by the cosmic shear part of the data vector. If we increase the precision of our mock analyses to a level roughly equivalent to LSST Y1, we find a similar pattern, with considerably more bias in a cosmic shear analysis than a 2x2pt one, and significant bias in a joint analysis of the two. Our findings suggest that IA model error can manifest itself as internal tension between 1x2 and 2x2 data vectors. We thus propose that such tension (or the lack thereof) can be employed as a test of model sufficiency or insufficiency when choosing a fiducial IA model, alongside other data-driven methods.more » « less
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT Counts of galaxy clusters offer a high-precision probe of cosmology, but control of systematic errors will determine the accuracy of this measurement. Using Buzzard simulations, we quantify one such systematic, the triaxiality distribution of clusters identified with the redMaPPer optical cluster finding algorithm, which was used in the Dark Energy Survey Year-1 (DES Y1) cluster cosmology analysis. We test whether redMaPPer selection biases the clusters’ shape and orientation and find that it only biases orientation, preferentially selecting clusters with their major axes oriented along the line of sight. Modelling the richness–mass relation as log-linear, we find that the log-richness amplitude ln (A) is boosted from the lowest to highest orientation bin with a significance of 14σ, while the orientation dependence of the richness-mass slope and intrinsic scatter is minimal. We also find that the weak lensing shear-profile ratios of cluster-associated dark haloes in different orientation bins resemble a ‘bottleneck’ shape that can be quantified with a Cauchy function. We test the correlation of orientation with two other leading systematics in cluster cosmology – miscentering and projection – and find a null correlation. The resulting mass bias predicted from our templates confirms the DES Y1 finding that triaxiality is a leading source of bias in cluster cosmology. However, the richness-dependence of the bias confirms that triaxiality does not fully resolve the tension at low-richness between DES Y1 cluster cosmology and other probes. Our model can be used for quantifying the impact of triaxiality bias on cosmological constraints for upcoming weak lensing surveys of galaxy clusters.
