sort results by

Use logical operators AND, OR, NOT and round brackets to construct complex queries. Whitespace-separated words are treated as ANDed.

Show articles per page in mode

Calvão, M. O.

Normalized to: Calvão, M.

4 article(s) in total. 16 co-authors, from 1 to 4 common article(s). Median position in authors list is 3,5.

[1]  oai:arXiv.org:1203.3213  [pdf] - 1365426
From cosmic deceleration to acceleration: new constraints from SN Ia and BAO/CMB
Comments: 25 pages, 9 figures
Submitted: 2012-03-14, last modified: 2016-02-29
We use type Ia supernovae (SN Ia) data in combination with recent baryonic acoustic oscillations (BAO) and cosmic microwave background (CMB) observations to constrain a kink-like parametrization of the deceleration parameter ($q$). This $q$-parametrization can be written in terms of the initial ($q_i$) and present ($q_0$) values of the deceleration parameter, the redshift of the cosmic transition from deceleration to acceleration ($z_t$) and the redshift width of such transition ($\tau$). By assuming a flat space geometry, $q_i=1/2$ and adopting a likelihood approach to deal with the SN Ia data we obtain, at the 68% confidence level (C.L.), that: $z_t=0.56^{+0.13}_{-0.10}$, $\tau=0.47^{+0.16}_{-0.20}$ and $q_0=-0.31^{+0.11}_{-0.11}$ when we combine BAO/CMB observations with SN Ia data processed with the MLCS2k2 light-curve fitter. When in this combination we use the SALT2 fitter we get instead, at the same C.L.: $z_t=0.64^{+0.13}_{-0.07}$, $\tau=0.36^{+0.11}_{-0.17}$ and $q_0=-0.53^{+0.17}_{-0.13}$. Our results indicate, with a quite general and model independent approach, that MLCS2k2 favors Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati-like cosmological models, while SALT2 favors $\Lambda$CDM-like ones. Progress in determining the transition redshift and/or the present value of the deceleration parameter depends crucially on solving the issue of the difference obtained when using these two light-curve fitters.
[2]  oai:arXiv.org:1411.3596  [pdf] - 1508121
Standardization of type Ia supernovae
Comments: 25 pages, 17 figures, 2 tables
Submitted: 2014-11-13
Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) have been intensively investigated due to its great homogeneity and high luminosity, which make it possible to use them as standardizable candles for the determination of cosmological parameters. In 2011, the physics Nobel prize was awarded for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae. This is a pedagogical article, aimed at those starting their study of that subject, in which we dwell on some topics related to the analysis of SNe Ia and their use in luminosity distance estimators. Here we investigate their spectral properties and light curve standardization, paying careful attention to the fundamental quantities directly related to the SNe Ia observables. Finally, we describe our own step-by-step implementation of a classical light curve fitter, the stretch, applying it to real data from the Carnegie Supernova Project.
[3]  oai:arXiv.org:1312.5706  [pdf] - 886839
Photometric type Ia supernova surveys in narrow band filters
Comments: 20 pages, 12 tables and 26 figures. Version accepted by MNRAS, with results slightly different from previous one
Submitted: 2013-12-19, last modified: 2014-10-23
We study the characteristics of a narrow band type Ia supernova survey through simulations based on the upcoming Javalambre Physics of the accelerating universe Astrophysical Survey (J-PAS). This unique survey has the capabilities of obtaining distances, redshifts, and the SN type from a single experiment thereby circumventing the challenges faced by the resource-intensive spectroscopic follow-up observations. We analyse the flux measurements signal-to-noise ratio and bias, the supernova typing performance, the ability to recover light curve parameters given by the SALT2 model, the photometric redshift precision from type Ia supernova light curves and the effects of systematic errors on the data. We show that such a survey is not only feasible but may yield large type Ia supernova samples (up to 250 supernovae at $z<0.5$ per month of search) with low core collapse contamination ($\sim 1.5$ per cent), good precision on the SALT2 parameters (average $\sigma_{m_B}=0.063$, $\sigma_{x_1}=0.47$ and $\sigma_c=0.040$) and on the distance modulus (average $\sigma_{\mu}=0.16$, assuming an intrinsic scatter $\sigma_{\mathrm{int}}=0.14$), with identified systematic uncertainties $\sigma_{\mathrm{sys}}\lesssim 0.10 \sigma_{\mathrm{stat}}$. Moreover, the filters are narrow enough to detect most spectral features and obtain excellent photometric redshift precision of $\sigma_z=0.005$, apart from $\sim$ 2 per cent of outliers. We also present a few strategies for optimising the survey's outcome. Together with the detailed host galaxy information, narrow band surveys can be very valuable for the study of supernova rates, spectral feature relations, intrinsic colour variations and correlations between supernova and host galaxy properties, all of which are important information for supernova cosmological applications.
[4]  oai:arXiv.org:1104.2874  [pdf] - 1053378
Type Ia supernova parameter estimation: a comparison of two approaches using current datasets
Comments: 16 pages, 5 figures. More complete analysis by including peculiar velocities and correlations among SALT2 parameters. Use of 2D contours instead of 1D intervals for comparison. There can be now a significant difference between the approaches, around 30% in contour area for MLCS2k2 and up to 13% for SALT2. Generic streamlining of text and suppression of section on model selection
Submitted: 2011-04-14, last modified: 2011-10-26
By using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) first year type Ia supernova (SN Ia) compilation, we compare two different approaches (traditional \chi^2 and complete likelihood) to determine parameter constraints when the magnitude dispersion is to be estimated as well. We consider cosmological constant + Cold Dark Matter (\Lambda CDM) and spatially flat, constant w Dark Energy + Cold Dark Matter (FwCDM) cosmological models and show that, for current data, there is a small difference in the best fit values and $\sim$ 30% difference in confidence contour areas in case the MLCS2k2 light-curve fitter is adopted. For the SALT2 light-curve fitter the differences are less significant ($\lesssim$ 13% difference in areas). In both cases the likelihood approach gives more restrictive constraints. We argue for the importance of using the complete likelihood instead of the \chi^2 approach when dealing with parameters in the expression for the variance.