Search for: All records

We present an alternative calibration of the MagLim lens sample redshift distributions from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) first 3 yr of data (Y3). The new calibration is based on a combination of a self-organizing-map-based scheme and clustering redshifts to estimate redshift distributions and inherent uncertainties, which is expected to be more accurate than the original DES Y3 redshift calibration of the lens sample. We describe in detail the methodology, and validate it on simulations and discuss the main effects dominating our error budget. The new calibration is in fair agreement with the fiducial DES Y3 n(z) calibration, with only mild differences (<3σ) in the means and widths of the distributions. We study the impact of this new calibration on cosmological constraints, analysing DES Y3 galaxy clustering and galaxy–galaxy lensing measurements, assuming a Lambda cold dark matter cosmology. We obtain Ωm = 0.30 ± 0.04, σ8 = 0.81 ± 0.07, and S8 = 0.81 ± 0.04, which implies a ∼0.4σ shift in the Ω − S8 plane compared to the fiducial DES Y3 results, highlighting the importance of the redshift calibration of the lens sample in multiprobe cosmological analyses.

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.