Consistent lensing and clustering in a low- <i>S</i>8 Universe with BOSS, DES Year 3, HSC Year 1, and KiDS-1000

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

ABSTRACT

We evaluate the consistency between lensing and clustering based on measurements from Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey combined with galaxy–galaxy lensing from Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 3, Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program (HSC) Year 1, and Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS)-1000. We find good agreement between these lensing data sets. We model the observations using the Dark Emulator and fit the data at two fixed cosmologies: Planck (S8 = 0.83), and a Lensing cosmology (S8 = 0.76). For a joint analysis limited to large scales, we find that both cosmologies provide an acceptable fit to the data. Full utilization of the higher signal-to-noise small-scale measurements is hindered by uncertainty in the impact of baryon feedback and assembly bias, which we account for with a reasoned theoretical error budget. We incorporate a systematic inconsistency parameter for each redshift bin, A, that decouples the lensing and clustering. With a wide range of scales, we find different results for the consistency between the two cosmologies. Limiting the analysis to the bins for which the impact of the lens sample selection is expected to be minimal, for the Lensing cosmology, the measurements are consistent with A = 1; A = 0.91 ± 0.04 (A = 0.97 ± 0.06) using DES+KiDS (HSC). For the Planck case, we find a discrepancy: A = 0.79 ± 0.03 (A = 0.84 ± 0.05) using DES+KiDS (HSC). We demonstrate that a kinematic Sunyaev–Zeldovich-based estimate for baryonic effects alleviates some of the discrepancy in the Planck cosmology. This analysis demonstrates the statistical power of small-scale measurements; however, caution is still warranted given modelling uncertainties and foreground sample selection effects.

Related collections

Most cited references 178

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment

John Hunter (2007)

0 comments Cited 5715 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Astropy: A community Python package for astronomy

Thomas P. Robitaille, Erik J. Tollerud, Perry Greenfield … (2015)

0 comments Cited 2201 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Planck 2018 results: VI. Cosmological parameters

N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M Ashdown … (2020)

We present cosmological parameter results from the final full-mission Planck measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies, combining information from the temperature and polarization maps and the lensing reconstruction. Compared to the 2015 results, improved measurements of large-scale polarization allow the reionization optical depth to be measured with higher precision, leading to significant gains in the precision of other correlated parameters. Improved modelling of the small-scale polarization leads to more robust constraints on many parameters, with residual modelling uncertainties estimated to affect them only at the 0.5 σ level. We find good consistency with the standard spatially-flat 6-parameter ΛCDM cosmology having a power-law spectrum of adiabatic scalar perturbations (denoted “base ΛCDM” in this paper), from polarization, temperature, and lensing, separately and in combination. A combined analysis gives dark matter density Ω c h 2 = 0.120 ± 0.001, baryon density Ω b h 2 = 0.0224 ± 0.0001, scalar spectral index n s = 0.965 ± 0.004, and optical depth τ = 0.054 ± 0.007 (in this abstract we quote 68% confidence regions on measured parameters and 95% on upper limits). The angular acoustic scale is measured to 0.03% precision, with 100 θ * = 1.0411 ± 0.0003. These results are only weakly dependent on the cosmological model and remain stable, with somewhat increased errors, in many commonly considered extensions. Assuming the base-ΛCDM cosmology, the inferred (model-dependent) late-Universe parameters are: Hubble constant H 0 = (67.4 ± 0.5) km s −1 Mpc −1 ; matter density parameter Ω m = 0.315 ± 0.007; and matter fluctuation amplitude σ 8 = 0.811 ± 0.006. We find no compelling evidence for extensions to the base-ΛCDM model. Combining with baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements (and considering single-parameter extensions) we constrain the effective extra relativistic degrees of freedom to be N eff = 2.99 ± 0.17, in agreement with the Standard Model prediction N eff = 3.046, and find that the neutrino mass is tightly constrained to ∑ m ν < 0.12 eV. The CMB spectra continue to prefer higher lensing amplitudes than predicted in base ΛCDM at over 2 σ , which pulls some parameters that affect the lensing amplitude away from the ΛCDM model; however, this is not supported by the lensing reconstruction or (in models that also change the background geometry) BAO data. The joint constraint with BAO measurements on spatial curvature is consistent with a flat universe, Ω K = 0.001 ± 0.002. Also combining with Type Ia supernovae (SNe), the dark-energy equation of state parameter is measured to be w 0 = −1.03 ± 0.03, consistent with a cosmological constant. We find no evidence for deviations from a purely power-law primordial spectrum, and combining with data from BAO, BICEP2, and Keck Array data, we place a limit on the tensor-to-scalar ratio r 0.002 < 0.06. Standard big-bang nucleosynthesis predictions for the helium and deuterium abundances for the base-ΛCDM cosmology are in excellent agreement with observations. The Planck base-ΛCDM results are in good agreement with BAO, SNe, and some galaxy lensing observations, but in slight tension with the Dark Energy Survey’s combined-probe results including galaxy clustering (which prefers lower fluctuation amplitudes or matter density parameters), and in significant, 3.6 σ , tension with local measurements of the Hubble constant (which prefer a higher value). Simple model extensions that can partially resolve these tensions are not favoured by the Planck data.