skip to main content

Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Cordero, J."

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.


    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.

    more » « less
  2. Free, publicly-accessible full text available October 20, 2024

    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

    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.

    more » « less

    We use the small scales of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year-3 cosmic shear measurements, which are excluded from the DES Year-3 cosmological analysis, to constrain the baryonic feedback. To model the baryonic feedback, we adopt a baryonic correction model and use the numerical package baccoemu to accelerate the evaluation of the baryonic non-linear matter power spectrum. We design our analysis pipeline to focus on the constraints of the baryonic suppression effects, utilizing the implication given by a principal component analysis on the Fisher forecasts. Our constraint on the baryonic effects can then be used to better model and ameliorate the effects of baryons in producing cosmological constraints from the next-generation large-scale structure surveys. We detect the baryonic suppression on the cosmic shear measurements with a ∼2σ significance. The characteristic halo mass for which half of the gas is ejected by baryonic feedback is constrained to be $M_c \gt 10^{13.2} \, h^{-1} \, \mathrm{M}_{\odot }$ (95 per cent C.L.). The best-fitting baryonic suppression is $\sim 5{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ at $k=1.0 \, {\rm Mpc}\ h^{-1}$ and $\sim 15{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ at $k=5.0 \, {\rm Mpc} \ h^{-1}$. Our findings are robust with respect to the assumptions about the cosmological parameters, specifics of the baryonic model, and intrinsic alignments.

    more » « less