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.
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.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10450139
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Volume:
- 525
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 0035-8711
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 2441-2471
- Size(s):
- p. 2441-2471
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT -
more » « less
ABSTRACT Cross-correlation between weak lensing of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) and weak lensing of galaxies offers a way to place robust constraints on cosmological and astrophysical parameters with reduced sensitivity to certain systematic effects affecting individual surveys. We measure the angular cross-power spectrum between the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) DR4 CMB lensing and the galaxy weak lensing measured by the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Y3 data. Our baseline analysis uses the CMB convergence map derived from ACT-DR4 and Planck data, where most of the contamination due to the thermal Sunyaev Zel’dovich effect is removed, thus avoiding important systematics in the cross-correlation. In our modelling, we consider the nuisance parameters of the photometric uncertainty, multiplicative shear bias and intrinsic alignment of galaxies. The resulting cross-power spectrum has a signal-to-noise ratio = 7.1 and passes a set of null tests. We use it to infer the amplitude of the fluctuations in the matter distribution (S8 ≡ σ8(Ωm/0.3)0.5 = 0.782 ± 0.059) with informative but well-motivated priors on the nuisance parameters. We also investigate the validity of these priors by significantly relaxing them and checking the consistency of the resulting posteriors, finding them consistent, albeit only with relatively weak constraints. This cross-correlation measurement will improve significantly with the new ACT-DR6 lensing map and form a key component of the joint 6×2pt analysis between DES and ACT.
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT In cosmology, we routinely choose between models to describe our data, and can incur biases due to insufficient models or lose constraining power with overly complex models. In this paper, we propose an empirical approach to model selection that explicitly balances parameter bias against model complexity. Our method uses synthetic data to calibrate the relation between bias and the χ2 difference between models. This allows us to interpret χ2 values obtained from real data (even if catalogues are blinded) and choose a model accordingly. We apply our method to the problem of intrinsic alignments – one of the most significant weak lensing systematics, and a major contributor to the error budget in modern lensing surveys. Specifically, we consider the example of the Dark Energy Survey Year 3 (DES Y3), and compare the commonly used non-linear alignment (NLA) and tidal alignment and tidal torque (TATT) models. The models are calibrated against bias in the Ωm–S8 plane. Once noise is accounted for, we find that it is possible to set a threshold Δχ2 that guarantees an analysis using NLA is unbiased at some specified level Nσ and confidence level. By contrast, we find that theoretically defined thresholds (based on, e.g. p-values for χ2) tend to be overly optimistic, and do not reliably rule out cosmological biases up to ∼1–2σ. Considering the real DES Y3 cosmic shear results, based on the reported difference in χ2 from NLA and TATT analyses, we find a roughly $30{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ chance that were NLA to be the fiducial model, the results would be biased (in the Ωm–S8 plane) by more than 0.3σ. More broadly, the method we propose here is simple and general, and requires a relatively low level of resources. We foresee applications to future analyses as a model selection tool in many contexts.
-
ABSTRACT We constrain the matter density Ωm and the amplitude of density fluctuations σ8 within the ΛCDM cosmological model with shear peak statistics and angular convergence power spectra using mass maps constructed from the first three years of data of the Dark Energy Survey (DES Y3). We use tomographic shear peak statistics, including cross-peaks: peak counts calculated on maps created by taking a harmonic space product of the convergence of two tomographic redshift bins. Our analysis follows a forward-modelling scheme to create a likelihood of these statistics using N-body simulations, using a Gaussian process emulator. We take into account the uncertainty from the remaining, largely unconstrained ΛCDM parameters (Ωb, ns, and h). We include the following lensing systematics: multiplicative shear bias, photometric redshift uncertainty, and galaxy intrinsic alignment. Stringent scale cuts are applied to avoid biases from unmodelled baryonic physics. We find that the additional non-Gaussian information leads to a tightening of the constraints on the structure growth parameter yielding $S_8~\equiv ~\sigma _8\sqrt{\Omega _{\mathrm{m}}/0.3}~=~0.797_{-0.013}^{+0.015}$ (68 per cent confidence limits), with a precision of 1.8 per cent, an improvement of 38 per cent compared to the angular power spectra only case. The results obtained with the angular power spectra and peak counts are found to be in agreement with each other and no significant difference in S8 is recorded. We find a mild tension of $1.5 \, \sigma$ between our study and the results from Planck 2018, with our analysis yielding a lower S8. Furthermore, we observe that the combination of angular power spectra and tomographic peak counts breaks the degeneracy between galaxy intrinsic alignment AIA and S8, improving cosmological constraints. We run a suite of tests concluding that our results are robust and consistent with the results from other studies using DES Y3 data.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract We present measurements of cosmic shear two-point correlation functions (TPCFs) from Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program (HSC) first-year data, and derive cosmological constraints based on a blind analysis. The HSC first-year shape catalog is divided into four tomographic redshift bins ranging from $z=0.3$ to 1.5 with equal widths of $\Delta z =0.3$. The unweighted galaxy number densities in each tomographic bin are 5.9, 5.9, 4.3, and $2.4\:$arcmin$^{-2}$ from the lowest to highest redshifts, respectively. We adopt the standard TPCF estimators, $\xi _\pm$, for our cosmological analysis, given that we find no evidence of significant B-mode shear. The TPCFs are detected at high significance for all 10 combinations of auto- and cross-tomographic bins over a wide angular range, yielding a total signal-to-noise ratio of 19 in the angular ranges adopted in the cosmological analysis, $7^{\prime }<\theta <56^{\prime }$ for $\xi _+$ and $28^{\prime }<\theta <178^{\prime }$ for $\xi _-$. We perform the standard Bayesian likelihood analysis for cosmological inference from the measured cosmic shear TPCFs, including contributions from intrinsic alignment of galaxies as well as systematic effects from PSF model errors, shear calibration uncertainty, and source redshift distribution errors. We adopt a covariance matrix derived from realistic mock catalogs constructed from full-sky gravitational lensing simulations that fully account for survey geometry and measurement noise. For a flat $\Lambda$ cold dark matter model, we find $S\,_8 \equiv \sigma _8\sqrt{\Omega _{\rm m}/0.3}=0.804_{-0.029}^{+0.032}$, and $\Omega _{\rm m}=0.346_{-0.100}^{+0.052}$. We carefully check the robustness of the cosmological results against astrophysical modeling uncertainties and systematic uncertainties in measurements, and find that none of them has a significant impact on the cosmological constraints.more » « less
