The combination of galaxy–galaxy lensing (GGL) and galaxy clustering is a powerful probe of low-redshift matter clustering, especially if it is extended to the non-linear regime. To this end, we use an N-body and halo occupation distribution (HOD) emulator method to model the redMaGiC sample of colour-selected passive galaxies in the Dark Energy Survey (DES), adding parameters that describe central galaxy incompleteness, galaxy assembly bias, and a scale-independent multiplicative lensing bias Alens. We use this emulator to forecast cosmological constraints attainable from the GGL surface density profile ΔΣ(rp) and the projected galaxy correlation function wp, gg(rp) in the final (Year 6) DES data set over scales $r_p=0.3\!-\!30.0\, h^{-1} \, \mathrm{Mpc}$. For a $3{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ prior on Alens we forecast precisions of $1.9{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$, $2.0{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$, and $1.9{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ on Ωm, σ8, and $S_8 \equiv \sigma _8\Omega _m^{0.5}$, marginalized over all halo occupation distribution (HOD) parameters as well as Alens. Adding scales $r_p=0.3\!-\!3.0\, h^{-1} \, \mathrm{Mpc}$ improves the S8 precision by a factor of ∼1.6 relative to a large scale ($3.0\!-\!30.0\, h^{-1} \, \mathrm{Mpc}$) analysis, equivalent to increasing the survey area by a factor of ∼2.6. Sharpening the Alens prior to $1{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ further improves the S8 precision to $1.1{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$, and it amplifies the gain from including non-linear scales. Our emulator achieves per cent-level accuracy similar to the projected DES statistical uncertainties, demonstrating the feasibility of a fully non-linear analysis. Obtaining precise parameter constraints from multiple galaxy types and from measurements that span linear and non-linear clustering offers many opportunities for internal cross-checks, which can diagnose systematics and demonstrate the robustness of cosmological results.
Galaxy clustering measurements are a key probe of the matter density field in the Universe. With the era of precision cosmology upon us, surveys rely on precise measurements of the clustering signal for meaningful cosmological analysis. However, the presence of systematic contaminants can bias the observed galaxy number density, and thereby bias the galaxy two-point statistics. As the statistical uncertainties get smaller, correcting for these systematic contaminants becomes increasingly important for unbiased cosmological analysis. We present and validate a new method for understanding and mitigating both additive and multiplicative systematics in galaxy clustering measurements (two-point function) by joint inference of contaminants in the galaxy overdensity field (one-point function) using a maximum-likelihood estimator (MLE). We test this methodology with Kilo-Degree Survey-like mock galaxy catalogues and synthetic systematic template maps. We estimate the cosmological impact of such mitigation by quantifying uncertainties and possible biases in the inferred relationship between the observed and the true galaxy clustering signal. Our method robustly corrects the clustering signal to the sub-per cent level and reduces numerous additive and multiplicative systematics from $1.5 \sigma$ to less than $0.1\sigma$ for the scenarios we tested. In addition, we provide an empirical approach to identifying the functional form (additive, multiplicative, or other) by which specific systematics contaminate the galaxy number density. Even though this approach is tested and geared towards systematics contaminating the galaxy number density, the methods can be extended to systematics mitigation for other two-point correlation measurements.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10517348
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Volume:
- 531
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0035-8711
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 4954-4973
- Size(s):
- p. 4954-4973
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT -
more » « less
ABSTRACT We present cosmological parameter constraints based on a joint modelling of galaxy–lensing cross-correlations and galaxy clustering measurements in the SDSS, marginalizing over small-scale modelling uncertainties using mock galaxy catalogues, without explicit modelling of galaxy bias. We show that our modelling method is robust to the impact of different choices for how galaxies occupy dark matter haloes and to the impact of baryonic physics (at the $\sim 2{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ level in cosmological parameters) and test for the impact of covariance on the likelihood analysis and of the survey window function on the theory computations. Applying our results to the measurements using galaxy samples from BOSS and lensing measurements using shear from SDSS galaxies and CMB lensing from Planck, with conservative scale cuts, we obtain $S_8\equiv \left(\frac{\sigma _8}{0.8228}\right)^{0.8}\left(\frac{\Omega _\mathrm{ m}}{0.307}\right)^{0.6}=0.85\pm 0.05$ (stat.) using LOWZ × SDSS galaxy lensing, and S8 = 0.91 ± 0.1 (stat.) using combination of LOWZ and CMASS × Planck CMB lensing. We estimate the systematic uncertainty in the galaxy–galaxy lensing measurements to be $\sim 6{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ (dominated by photometric redshift uncertainties) and in the galaxy–CMB lensing measurements to be $\sim 3{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$, from small-scale modelling uncertainties including baryonic physics.
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT We introduce a novel technique for constraining cosmological parameters and galaxy assembly bias using non-linear redshift-space clustering of galaxies. We scale cosmological N-body simulations and insert galaxies with the SubHalo Abundance Matching extended (SHAMe) empirical model to generate over 175 000 clustering measurements spanning all relevant cosmological and SHAMe parameter values. We then build an emulator capable of reproducing the projected galaxy correlation function at the monopole, quadrupole, and hexadecapole level for separations between $0.1\, h^{-1}\, {\rm Mpc}$ and $25\, h^{-1}\, {\rm Mpc}$. We test this approach by using the emulator and Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) inference to jointly estimate cosmology and assembly bias parameters both for the MTNG740 hydrodynamic simulation and for a semi-analytical model (SAM) galaxy formation built on the MTNG740-DM dark matter-only simulation, obtaining unbiased results for all cosmological parameters. For instance, for MTNG740 and a galaxy number density of $n\sim 0.01 h^{3}\, {\rm Mpc}^{-3}$, we obtain $\sigma _{8}=0.799^{+0.039}_{-0.044}$ and $\Omega _\mathrm{M}h^2= 0.138^{+ 0.025}_{- 0.018}$ (which are within 0.4 and 0.2σ of the MTNG cosmology). For fixed Hubble parameter (h), the constraint becomes $\Omega _\mathrm{M}h^2= 0.137^{+ 0.011}_{- 0.012}$. Our method performs similarly well for the SAM and for other tested sample densities. We almost always recover the true amount of galaxy assembly bias within 1σ. The best constraints are obtained when scales smaller than $2\, h^{-1}\, {\rm Mpc}$ are included, as well as when at least the projected correlation function and the monopole are incorporated. These methods offer a powerful way to constrain cosmological parameters using galaxy surveys.
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT We study the effect of magnification in the Dark Energy Survey Year 3 analysis of galaxy clustering and galaxy–galaxy lensing, using two different lens samples: a sample of luminous red galaxies, redMaGiC, and a sample with a redshift-dependent magnitude limit, MagLim. We account for the effect of magnification on both the flux and size selection of galaxies, accounting for systematic effects using the Balrog image simulations. We estimate the impact of magnification on the galaxy clustering and galaxy–galaxy lensing cosmology analysis, finding it to be a significant systematic for the MagLim sample. We show cosmological constraints from the galaxy clustering autocorrelation and galaxy–galaxy lensing signal with different magnifications priors, finding broad consistency in cosmological parameters in ΛCDM and wCDM. However, when magnification bias amplitude is allowed to be free, we find the two-point correlation functions prefer a different amplitude to the fiducial input derived from the image simulations. We validate the magnification analysis by comparing the cross-clustering between lens bins with the prediction from the baseline analysis, which uses only the autocorrelation of the lens bins, indicating that systematics other than magnification may be the cause of the discrepancy. We show that adding the cross-clustering between lens redshift bins to the fit significantly improves the constraints on lens magnification parameters and allows uninformative priors to be used on magnification coefficients, without any loss of constraining power or prior volume concerns.
-
more » « less
ABSTRACT Recent cosmological analyses with large-scale structure and weak lensing measurements, usually referred to as 3 × 2pt, had to discard a lot of signal to noise from small scales due to our inability to accurately model non-linearities and baryonic effects. Galaxy–galaxy lensing, or the position–shear correlation between lens and source galaxies, is one of the three two-point correlation functions that are included in such analyses, usually estimated with the mean tangential shear. However, tangential shear measurements at a given angular scale θ or physical scale R carry information from all scales below that, forcing the scale cuts applied in real data to be significantly larger than the scale at which theoretical uncertainties become problematic. Recently, there have been a few independent efforts that aim to mitigate the non-locality of the galaxy–galaxy lensing signal. Here, we perform a comparison of the different methods, including the Y-transformation, the point-mass marginalization methodology, and the annular differential surface density statistic. We do the comparison at the cosmological constraints level in a combined galaxy clustering and galaxy–galaxy lensing analysis. We find that all the estimators yield equivalent cosmological results assuming a simulated Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) Year 1 like set-up and also when applied to DES Y3 data. With the LSST Y1 set-up, we find that the mitigation schemes yield ∼1.3 times more constraining S8 results than applying larger scale cuts without using any mitigation scheme.
