As the number of observed Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) continues to grow, follow-up resources need to be used more efficiently in order to maximize science output from limited telescope time. As such, it is becoming increasingly important to rapidly identify bursts of interest as soon as possible after the event, before the afterglows fade beyond detectability. Studying the most distant (highest redshift) events, for instance, remains a primary goal for many in the field. Here we present our Random forest Automated Triage Estimator for GRB redshifts (RATE GRB-z) for rapid identification of high-redshift candidates using early-time metrics from the three telescopes onboard Swift. While the basic RATE methodology is generalizable to a number of resource allocation problems, here we demonstrate its utility for telescope-constrained follow-up efforts with the primary goal to identify and study high-z GRBs. For each new GRB, RATE GRB-z provides a recommendation - based on the available telescope time - of whether the event warrants additional follow-up resources. We train RATE GRB-z using a set consisting of 135 Swift bursts with known redshifts, only 18 of which are z > 4. Cross-validated performance metrics on this training data suggest that ~56% of high-z bursts can be captured from following up the top 20% of the ranked candidates, and ~84% of high-z bursts are identified after following up the top ~40% of candidates. We further use the method to rank 200+ Swift bursts with unknown redshifts according to their likelihood of being high-z.

We present the results of attempts to detect the ellipticity of dark matter halos using galaxy-galaxy weak lensing with SDSS data. We use 2,020,256 galaxies brighter than r=19 with photometric redshifts (divided into colour and luminosity subsamples) as lenses and 31,697,869 source galaxies. We search for and identify several signal contaminants, which if not removed lead to a spurious detection. These include systematic shear that leads to a slight spurious alignment of lens and source ellipticities, intrinsic alignments (due to contamination of the source sample by physically-associated lens source pairs), and anisotropic magnification bias. We develop methods that allow us to remove these contaminants to the signal. We split the analysis into blue (spiral) and red (elliptical) galaxies. Assuming Gaussian errors as in previous work and a power-law profile, we find f_h=e_h/e_g=0.1+/-0.06 for red galaxies and -0.8+/-0.4 for blue galaxies using 20-300 kpc/h, averaged over luminosity. Inclusion of the more realistic non-Gaussian error distributions and of the NFW density profile (which predicts much smaller ellipticity of the shear for scales above the scale radius) yields 0.60+/-0.38 for ellipticals and -1.4+1.7-2.0 for spirals. While there is no concrete detection of alignment in either case, there is a suggestion in the data of a positive alignment in the brightest lens sample of ellipticals. Our results appear to be mildly inconsistent with a previously reported detection by Hoekstra et al. (2004), but more data and further tests are needed to clarify whether the discrepancy is real or a consequence of differences in the lens galaxy samples used and analysis methods.

We investigate the required redshift accuracy of type Ia supernova and cluster number-count surveys in order for the redshift uncertainties not to contribute appreciably to the dark energy parameter error budget. For the SNAP supernova experiment, we find that, without the assistance of ground-based measurements, individual supernova redshifts would need to be determined to about 0.002 or better, which is a challenging but feasible requirement for a low-resolution spectrograph. However, we find that accurate redshifts for z<0.1 supernovae, obtained with ground-based experiments, are sufficient to immunize the results against even relatively large redshift errors at high z. For the future cluster number-count surveys such as the South Pole Telescope, Planck or DUET, we find that the purely statistical error in photometric redshift is less important, and that the irreducible, systematic bias in redshift drives the requirements. The redshift bias will have to be kept below 0.001-0.005 per redshift bin (which is determined by the filter set), depending on the sky coverage and details of the definition of the minimal mass of the survey. Furthermore, we find that X-ray surveys have a more stringent required redshift accuracy than Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) effect surveys since they use a shorter lever arm in redshift; conversely, SZ surveys benefit from their high redshift reach only so long as some redshift information is available for distant (z>1) clusters.