Normalized to: DES Collaboration.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:2007.00050 [pdf] - 2126330
A DESGW Search for the Electromagnetic Counterpart to the LIGO/Virgo
Gravitational Wave Binary Neutron Star Merger Candidate S190510g
DES Collaboration;
Garcia, A.;
Morgan, R.;
Herner, K.;
Palmese, A.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Annis, J.;
Brout, D.;
Vivas, A. K.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Santana-Silva, L.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Allam, S.;
Wiesner, M.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gill, M. S. S.;
Sako, M.;
Kessler, R.;
Davis, T. M.;
Scolnic, D.;
E., F. Olivares;
Paz-Chinchón, F.;
Sherman, N.;
Conselice, C.;
Chen, H.;
Foley, R. J.;
Doctor, Z.;
Horvath, J.;
Howell, D. A.;
Kilpatrick, C. D.;
Casares, J.;
Cooke, J.;
Rest, A.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Aguena, M.;
Avila, S.;
Bertin, E.;
Bhargava, S.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Costanzi, M.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Everett, S.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Friedel, D.;
Frieman, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hinton, S. R.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Varga, T. N.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.
Submitted: 2020-06-30
We present the results from a search for the electromagnetic counterpart of
the LIGO/Virgo event S190510g using the Dark Energy Camera (DECam). S190510g is
a binary neutron star (BNS) merger candidate of moderate significance detected
at a distance of 227$\pm$92 Mpc and localized within an area of 31 (1166)
square degrees at 50\% (90\%) confidence. While this event was later classified
as likely non-astrophysical in nature within 30 hours of the event, our short
latency search and discovery pipeline identified 11 counterpart candidates, all
of which appear consistent with supernovae following offline analysis and
spectroscopy by other instruments. Later reprocessing of the images enabled the
recovery of 6 more candidates. Additionally, we implement our candidate
selection procedure on simulated kilonovae and supernovae under DECam observing
conditions (e.g., seeing, exposure time) with the intent of quantifying our
search efficiency and making informed decisions on observing strategy for
future similar events. This is the first BNS counterpart search to employ a
comprehensive simulation-based efficiency study. We find that using the current
follow-up strategy, there would need to be 19 events similar to S190510g for us
to have a 99\% chance of detecting an optical counterpart, assuming a
GW170817-like kilonova. We further conclude that optimization of observing
plans, which should include preference for deeper images over multiple color
information, could result in up to a factor of 1.5 reduction in the total
number of followups needed for discovery.
[2]
oai:arXiv.org:2002.11124 [pdf] - 2055421
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Cluster
Abundances and Weak Lensing
DES Collaboration;
Abbott, Tim;
Aguena, Michel;
Alarcon, Alex;
Allam, Sahar;
Allen, Steve;
Annis, James;
Avila, Santiago;
Bacon, David;
Bermeo, Alberto;
Bernstein, Gary;
Bertin, Emmanuel;
Bhargava, Sunayana;
Bocquet, Sebastian;
Brooks, David;
Brout, Dillon;
Buckley-Geer, Elizabeth;
Burke, David;
Rosell, Aurelio Carnero;
Kind, Matias Carrasco;
Carretero, Jorge;
Castander, Francisco Javier;
Cawthon, Ross;
Chang, Chihway;
Chen, Xinyi;
Choi, Ami;
Costanzi, Matteo;
Crocce, Martin;
da Costa, Luiz;
Davis, Tamara;
De Vicente, Juan;
DeRose, Joseph;
Desai, Shantanu;
Diehl, H. Thomas;
Dietrich, Jörg;
Dodelson, Scott;
Doel, Peter;
Drlica-Wagner, Alex;
Eckert, Kathleen;
Eifler, Tim;
Elvin-Poole, Jack;
Estrada, Juan;
Everett, Spencer;
Evrard, August;
Farahi, Arya;
Ferrero, Ismael;
Flaugher, Brenna;
Fosalba, Pablo;
Frieman, Josh;
Garcia-Bellido, Juan;
Gatti, Marco;
Gaztanaga, Enrique;
Gerdes, David;
Giannantonio, Tommaso;
Giles, Paul;
Grandis, Sebastian;
Gruen, Daniel;
Gruendl, Robert;
Gschwend, Julia;
Gutierrez, Gaston;
Hartley, Will;
Hinton, Samuel;
Hollowood, Devon L.;
Honscheid, Klaus;
Hoyle, Ben;
Huterer, Dragan;
James, David;
Jarvis, Mike;
Jeltema, Tesla;
Johnson, Margaret;
Kent, Stephen;
Krause, Elisabeth;
Kron, Richard;
Kuehn, Kyler;
Kuropatkin, Nikolay;
Lahav, Ofer;
Li, Ting;
Lidman, Christopher;
Lima, Marcos;
Lin, Huan;
MacCrann, Niall;
Maia, Marcio;
Mantz, Adam;
Marshall, Jennifer;
Martini, Paul;
Mayers, Julian;
Melchior, Peter;
Mena, Juan;
Menanteau, Felipe;
Miquel, Ramon;
Mohr, Joe;
Nichol, Robert;
Nord, Brian;
Ogando, Ricardo;
Palmese, Antonella;
Paz-Chinchon, Francisco;
Malagón, Andrés Plazas;
Prat, Judit;
Rau, Markus Michael;
Romer, Kathy;
Roodman, Aaron;
Rooney, Philip;
Rozo, Eduardo;
Rykoff, Eli;
Sako, Masao;
Samuroff, Simon;
Sanchez, Carles;
Saro, Alexandro;
Scarpine, Vic;
Schubnell, Michael;
Scolnic, Daniel;
Serrano, Santiago;
Sevilla, Ignacio;
Sheldon, Erin;
Smith, J. Allyn;
Suchyta, Eric;
Swanson, Molly;
Tarle, Gregory;
Thomas, Daniel;
To, Chun-Hao;
Troxel, Michael A.;
Tucker, Douglas;
Varga, Tamas Norbert;
von der Linden, Anja;
Walker, Alistair;
Wechsler, Risa;
Weller, Jochen;
Wilkinson, Reese;
Wu, Hao-Yi;
Yanny, Brian;
Zhang, Zhuowen;
Zuntz, Joe
Submitted: 2020-02-25
We perform a joint analysis of the counts and weak lensing signal of
redMaPPer clusters selected from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 1 dataset.
Our analysis uses the same shear and source photometric redshifts estimates as
were used in the DES combined probes analysis. Our analysis results in
surprisingly low values for $S_8 =\sigma_8(\Omega_{\rm m}/0.3)^{0.5}= 0.65\pm
0.04$, driven by a low matter density parameter, $\Omega_{\rm
m}=0.179^{+0.031}_{-0.038}$, with $\sigma_8-\Omega_{\rm m}$ posteriors in
$2.4\sigma$ tension with the DES Y1 3x2pt results, and in $5.6\sigma$ with the
Planck CMB analysis. These results include the impact of post-unblinding
changes to the analysis, which did not improve the level of consistency with
other data sets compared to the results obtained at the unblinding. The fact
that multiple cosmological probes (supernovae, baryon acoustic oscillations,
cosmic shear, galaxy clustering and CMB anisotropies), and other galaxy cluster
analyses all favor significantly higher matter densities suggests the presence
of systematic errors in the data or an incomplete modeling of the relevant
physics. Cross checks with X-ray and microwave data, as well as independent
constraints on the observable--mass relation from SZ selected clusters, suggest
that the discrepancy resides in our modeling of the weak lensing signal rather
than the cluster abundance. Repeating our analysis using a higher richness
threshold ($\lambda \ge 30$) significantly reduces the tension with other
probes, and points to one or more richness-dependent effects not captured by
our model.
[3]
oai:arXiv.org:1810.02499 [pdf] - 1995367
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Constraints on Extended Cosmological
Models from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing
DES Collaboration;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Avila, S.;
Banerji, M.;
Baxter, E.;
Bechtol, K.;
Becker, M. R.;
Bertin, E.;
Blazek, J.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
Brout, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Campos, A.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chang, C.;
Chen, A.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DeRose, J.;
Desai, S.;
Di Valentino, E.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dodelson, S.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Fernandez, E.;
Ferté, A.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kim, A. G.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lee, S.;
Lemos, P.;
Leonard, C. D.;
Li, T. S.;
Liddle, A. R.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Miranda, V.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Muir, J.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Raveri, M.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Rosenfeld, R.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Scolnic, D.;
Secco, L. F.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weaverdyck, N.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Yanny, B.;
Zhang, Y.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2018-10-04, last modified: 2019-11-08
We present constraints on extensions of the minimal cosmological models
dominated by dark matter and dark energy, $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM, by using a
combined analysis of galaxy clustering and weak gravitational lensing from the
first-year data of the Dark Energy Survey (DES Y1) in combination with external
data. We consider four extensions of the minimal dark energy-dominated
scenarios: 1) nonzero curvature $\Omega_k$, 2) number of relativistic species
$N_{\rm eff}$ different from the standard value of 3.046, 3) time-varying
equation-of-state of dark energy described by the parameters $w_0$ and $w_a$
(alternatively quoted by the values at the pivot redshift, $w_p$, and $w_a$),
and 4) modified gravity described by the parameters $\mu_0$ and $\Sigma_0$ that
modify the metric potentials. We also consider external information from Planck
CMB measurements; BAO measurements from SDSS, 6dF, and BOSS; RSD measurements
from BOSS; and SNIa information from the Pantheon compilation. Constraints on
curvature and the number of relativistic species are dominated by the external
data; when these are combined with DES Y1, we find
$\Omega_k=0.0020^{+0.0037}_{-0.0032}$ at the 68% confidence level, and $N_{\rm
eff}<3.28\, (3.55)$ at 68% (95%) confidence. For the time-varying
equation-of-state, we find the pivot value $(w_p, w_a)=(-0.91^{+0.19}_{-0.23},
-0.57^{+0.93}_{-1.11})$ at pivot redshift $z_p=0.27$ from DES alone, and $(w_p,
w_a)=(-1.01^{+0.04}_{-0.04}, -0.28^{+0.37}_{-0.48})$ at $z_p=0.20$ from DES Y1
combined with external data; in either case we find no evidence for the
temporal variation of the equation of state. For modified gravity, we find the
present-day value of the relevant parameters to be $\Sigma_0=
0.43^{+0.28}_{-0.29}$ from DES Y1 alone, and $(\Sigma_0,
\mu_0)=(0.06^{+0.08}_{-0.07}, -0.11^{+0.42}_{-0.46})$ from DES Y1 combined with
external data, consistent with predictions from GR.
[4]
oai:arXiv.org:1811.02375 [pdf] - 1877871
Cosmological Constraints from Multiple Probes in the Dark Energy Survey
DES Collaboration;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Alarcon, A.;
Allam, S.;
Andersen, P.;
Andrade-Oliveira, F.;
Annis, J.;
Asorey, J.;
Avelino, A.;
Avila, S.;
Bacon, D.;
Banik, N.;
Bassett, B. A.;
Baxter, E.;
Bechtol, K.;
Becker, M. R.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Blazek, J.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
Brout, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Calcino, J.;
Camacho, H.;
Campos, A.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Carollo, D.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Challis, P.;
Chan, K. C.;
Chang, C.;
Childress, M.;
Clocchiatti, A.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
Davis, T. M.;
De Vicente, J.;
DePoy, D. L.;
DeRose, J.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dodelson, S.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Fernandez, E.;
Filippenko, A. V.;
Flaugher, B.;
Foley, R. J.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
Galbany, L.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gatti, M.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Glazebrook, K.;
Goldstein, D. A.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hinton, S. R.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoormann, J. K.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeltema, T.;
Kasai, E.;
Kent, S.;
Kessler, R.;
Kim, A. G.;
Kirshner, R. P.;
Kokron, N.;
Krause, E.;
Kron, R.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lasker, J.;
Lemos, P.;
Lewis, G. F.;
Li, T. S.;
Lidman, C.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Macaulay, E.;
MacCrann, N.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Mandel, K. S.;
March, M.;
Marriner, J.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
McMahon, R. G.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Morganson, E.;
Muir, J.;
Möller, A.;
Neilsen, E.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Palmese, A.;
Pan, Y. -C.;
Peiris, H. V.;
Percival, W. J.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Porredon, A.;
Prat, J.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Rosenfeld, R.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Scolnic, D.;
Secco, L. F.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sharp, R.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Sommer, N. E.;
Swann, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Thomas, R. C.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Tucker, B. E.;
Uddin, S. A.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wang, M.;
Weaverdyck, N.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Yanny, B.;
Zhang, B.;
Zhang, Y.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2018-11-06, last modified: 2019-05-06
The combination of multiple observational probes has long been advocated as a
powerful technique to constrain cosmological parameters, in particular dark
energy. The Dark Energy Survey has measured 207 spectroscopically--confirmed
Type Ia supernova lightcurves; the baryon acoustic oscillation feature; weak
gravitational lensing; and galaxy clustering. Here we present combined results
from these probes, deriving constraints on the equation of state, $w$, of dark
energy and its energy density in the Universe. Independently of other
experiments, such as those that measure the cosmic microwave background, the
probes from this single photometric survey rule out a Universe with no dark
energy, finding $w=-0.80^{+0.09}_{-0.11}$. The geometry is shown to be
consistent with a spatially flat Universe, and we obtain a constraint on the
baryon density of $\Omega_b=0.069^{+0.009}_{-0.012}$ that is independent of
early Universe measurements. These results demonstrate the potential power of
large multi-probe photometric surveys and pave the way for order of magnitude
advances in our constraints on properties of dark energy and cosmology over the
next decade.
[5]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01530 [pdf] - 1840662
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Galaxy
Clustering and Weak Lensing
DES Collaboration;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Alarcon, A.;
Aleksić, J.;
Allam, S.;
Allen, S.;
Amara, A.;
Annis, J.;
Asorey, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bacon, D.;
Balbinot, E.;
Banerji, M.;
Banik, N.;
Barkhouse, W.;
Baumer, M.;
Baxter, E.;
Bechtol, K.;
Becker, M. R.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Blazek, J.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
Brout, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Busha, M. T.;
Capozzi, D.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chang, C.;
Chen, N.;
Childress, M.;
Choi, A.;
Conselice, C.;
Crittenden, R.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Das, R.;
Davis, T. M.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DePoy, D. L.;
DeRose, J.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dodelson, S.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Elliott, A. E.;
Elsner, F.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Fang, Y.;
Fernandez, E.;
Ferté, A.;
Finley, D. A.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Friedrich, O.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Garcia-Fernandez, M.;
Gatti, M.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gill, M. S. S.;
Glazebrook, K.;
Goldstein, D. A.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hamilton, S.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hinton, S. R.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Kacprzak, T.;
Kent, S.;
Kim, A. G.;
King, A.;
Kirk, D.;
Kokron, N.;
Kovacs, A.;
Krause, E.;
Krawiec, C.;
Kremin, A.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lacasa, F.;
Lahav, O.;
Li, T. S.;
Liddle, A. R.;
Lidman, C.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
MacCrann, N.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Makler, M.;
Manera, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
McMahon, R. G.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Miranda, V.;
Mudd, D.;
Muir, J.;
Möller, A.;
Neilsen, E.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Nugent, P.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Palmese, A.;
Peacock, J.;
Peiris, H. V.;
Peoples, J.;
Percival, W. J.;
Petravick, D.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Porredon, A.;
Prat, J.;
Pujol, A.;
Rau, M. M.;
Refregier, A.;
Ricker, P. M.;
Roe, N.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Rosenfeld, R.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sako, M.;
Salvador, A. I.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sanchez, E.;
Santiago, B.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Scolnic, D.;
Secco, L. F.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, R. C.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, J.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Tucker, B. E.;
Uddin, S. A.;
Varga, T. N.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Vikram, V.;
Vivas, A. K.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wang, M.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Wester, W.;
Wolf, R. C.;
Yanny, B.;
Yuan, F.;
Zenteno, A.;
Zhang, B.;
Zhang, Y.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2019-03-01
We present cosmological results from a combined analysis of galaxy clustering
and weak gravitational lensing, using 1321 deg$^2$ of $griz$ imaging data from
the first year of the Dark Energy Survey (DES Y1). We combine three two-point
functions: (i) the cosmic shear correlation function of 26 million source
galaxies in four redshift bins, (ii) the galaxy angular autocorrelation
function of 650,000 luminous red galaxies in five redshift bins, and (iii) the
galaxy-shear cross-correlation of luminous red galaxy positions and source
galaxy shears. To demonstrate the robustness of these results, we use
independent pairs of galaxy shape, photometric redshift estimation and
validation, and likelihood analysis pipelines. To prevent confirmation bias,
the bulk of the analysis was carried out while blind to the true results; we
describe an extensive suite of systematics checks performed and passed during
this blinded phase. The data are modeled in flat $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM
cosmologies, marginalizing over 20 nuisance parameters, varying 6 (for
$\Lambda$CDM) or 7 (for $w$CDM) cosmological parameters including the neutrino
mass density and including the 457 $\times$ 457 element analytic covariance
matrix. We find consistent cosmological results from these three two-point
functions, and from their combination obtain $S_8 \equiv \sigma_8
(\Omega_m/0.3)^{0.5} = 0.783^{+0.021}_{-0.025}$ and $\Omega_m =
0.264^{+0.032}_{-0.019}$ for $\Lambda$CDM for $w$CDM, we find $S_8 =
0.794^{+0.029}_{-0.027}$, $\Omega_m = 0.279^{+0.043}_{-0.022}$, and
$w=-0.80^{+0.20}_{-0.22}$ at 68% CL. The precision of these DES Y1 results
rivals that from the Planck cosmic microwave background measurements, allowing
a comparison of structure in the very early and late Universe on equal terms.
Although the DES Y1 best-fit values for $S_8$ and $\Omega_m$ are lower than the
central values from Planck ...
[6]
oai:arXiv.org:1711.00403 [pdf] - 1739830
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: A Precise H0 Measurement from DES Y1,
BAO, and D/H Data
DES Collaboration;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bernstein, R. A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Chang, C. L.;
Crawford, T. M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
Garcia-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Henning, J. W.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Liddle, A. R.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Manzotti, A.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Natoli, T.;
Nugent, P.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Park, Y.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Reichardt, C. L.;
Reil, K.;
Roodman, A.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Wester, W.;
Wu, W. L. K.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2017-11-01
We combine Dark Energy Survey Year 1 clustering and weak lensing data with
Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN)
experiments to constrain the Hubble constant. Assuming a flat $\Lambda$CDM
model with minimal neutrino mass ($\sum m_\nu = 0.06$ eV) we find
$H_0=67.2^{+1.2}_{-1.0}$ km/s/Mpc (68% CL). This result is completely
independent of Hubble constant measurements based on the distance ladder,
Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) anisotropies (both temperature and
polarization), and strong lensing constraints. There are now five data sets
that: a) have no shared observational systematics; and b) each constrain the
Hubble constant with a few percent level precision. We compare these five
independent measurements, and find that, as a set, the differences between them
are significant at the $2.1\sigma$ level ($\chi^2/dof=20.1/11$, probability to
exceed=4%). This difference is low enough that we consider the data sets
statistically consistent with each other. The best fit Hubble constant obtained
by combining all five data sets is $H_0 = 69.1^{+0.4}_{-0.6}$ km/s/Mpc.