Normalized to: Elvin-Poole, J.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:2002.07762 [pdf] - 2128200
Direct comparison of sterile neutrino constraints from cosmological
data, $\nu_{e}$ disappearance data and $\nu_{\mu}\rightarrow\nu_{e}$
appearance data in a $3+1$ model
Submitted: 2020-02-18, last modified: 2020-07-04
We present a quantitative, direct comparison of constraints on sterile
neutrinos derived from neutrino oscillation experiments and from Planck data,
interpreted assuming standard cosmological evolution. We extend a $1+1$ model,
which is used to compare exclusions contours at the 95% CL derived from Planck
data to those from $\nu_{e}$-disappearance measurements, to a $3+1$ model. This
allows us to compare the Planck constraints with those obtained through
$\nu_{\mu}\rightarrow\nu_{e}$ appearance searches, which are sensitive to more
than one active-sterile mixing angle. We find that the cosmological data fully
exclude the allowed regions published by the LSND, MiniBooNE and Neutrino-4
collaborations, and those from the gallium and rector anomalies, at the 95% CL.
Compared to the exclusion regions from the Daya Bay $\nu_{e}$-disappearance
search, the Planck data are more strongly excluding above $|\Delta
m^{2}_{41}|\approx 0.1\, \mathrm{eV}^{2}$ and
$m_\mathrm{eff}^\mathrm{sterile}\approx 0.2\, \mathrm{eV}$, with the Daya Bay
exclusion being stronger below these values. Compared to the combined Daya
Bay/Bugey/MINOS exclusion region on $\nu_{\mu}\rightarrow\nu_{e}$ appearance,
the Planck data is more strongly excluding above $\Delta m^{2}_{41}\approx
5\times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{eV}^{2}$, with the exclusion strengths of the Planck
data and the Daya Bay/Bugey/MINOS combination becoming comparable below this
value.
[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:1906.01136 [pdf] - 1966790
Producing a BOSS-CMASS sample with DES imaging
Lee, S.;
Huff, E. M.;
Ross, A. J.;
Choi, A.;
Hirata, C.;
Honscheid, K.;
MacCrann, N.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Davis, C.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Cawthon, R.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
da Costa, L. N.;
De Vicente, J.;
Desai, S.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Kuehn, K.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Palmese, A.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Weller, J.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2019-06-03
We present a sample of galaxies with the Dark Energy Survey (DES) photometry
that replicates the properties of the BOSS CMASS sample. The CMASS galaxy
sample has been well characterized by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)
collaboration and was used to obtain the most powerful redshift-space galaxy
clustering measurements to date. A joint analysis of redshift-space distortions
(such as those probed by CMASS from SDSS) and a galaxy-galaxy lensing
measurement for an equivalent sample from DES can provide powerful cosmological
constraints. Unfortunately, the DES and SDSS-BOSS footprints have only minimal
overlap, primarily on the celestial equator near the SDSS Stripe 82 region.
Using this overlap, we build a robust Bayesian model to select CMASS-like
galaxies in the remainder of the DES footprint. The newly defined DES-CMASS
(DMASS) sample consists of 117,293 effective galaxies covering $1,244 {\rm
deg}^2$. Through various validation tests, we show that the DMASS sample
selected by this model matches well with the BOSS CMASS sample, specifically in
the South Galactic cap (SGC) region that includes Stripe 82. Combining
measurements of the angular correlation function and the clustering-z
distribution of DMASS, we constrain the difference in mean galaxy bias and mean
redshift between the BOSS CMASS and DMASS samples to be $\Delta b =
0.010^{+0.045}_{-0.052}$ and $\Delta z = \left( 3.46^{+5.48}_{-5.55} \right)
\times 10^{-3}$ for the SGC portion of CMASS, and $\Delta b =
0.044^{+0.044}_{-0.043} $ and $\Delta z= ( 3.51^{+4.93}_{-5.91}) \times
10^{-3}$ for the full CMASS sample. These values indicate that the mean bias of
galaxies and mean redshift in the DMASS sample is consistent with both CMASS
samples within $1\sigma$.
[5]
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.
[6]
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 ...
[7]
oai:arXiv.org:1811.07812 [pdf] - 1830517
More out of less: an excess integrated Sachs-Wolfe signal from
supervoids mapped out by the Dark Energy Survey
Kovács, A.;
Sánchez, C.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Hamaus, N.;
Miranda, V.;
Nadathur, S.;
Abbott, T.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DePoy, D.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
Gaztañaga, E.;
Gerdes, D.;
Gruendl, R.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
James, D. J.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, K.;
Rykoff, E.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Vikram, V.;
Weller, J.
Submitted: 2018-11-19, last modified: 2019-01-29
The largest structures in the cosmic web probe the dynamical nature of dark
energy through their integrated Sachs-Wolfe imprints. In the strength of the
signal, typical cosmic voids have shown good consistency with expectation
$A_{\rm ISW}=\Delta T^{\rm data} / \Delta T^{\rm theory}=1$, given the
substantial cosmic variance. Discordantly, large-scale hills in the
gravitational potential, or supervoids, have shown excess signals. In this
study, we mapped out 87 new supervoids in the total 5000 deg$^2$ footprint of
the Dark Energy Survey at $0.2<z<0.9$ to probe these anomalous claims. We found
an excess imprinted profile with $ A_{\rm ISW}\approx4.1\pm2.0$ amplitude. The
combination with independent BOSS data reveals an ISW imprint of supervoids at
the $3.3\sigma$ significance level with an enhanced $A_{\rm
ISW}\approx5.2\pm1.6$ amplitude. The tension with $\Lambda$CDM predictions is
equivalent to $2.6\sigma$ and remains unexplained.
[8]
oai:arXiv.org:1712.06211 [pdf] - 1798221
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Galaxy Sample for BAO Measurement
Crocce, M.;
Ross, A. J.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Avila, S.;
Alarcon, A.;
Chan, K. C.;
Banik, N.;
Carretero, J.;
Sanchez, E.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Sanchez, C.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Rosenfeld, R.;
Salvador, A. I.;
Garcia-Fernandez, M.;
Garcia-Bellido, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Levy, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bernstein, R. A.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
Garcia-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hollowood, D.;
Honscheid, K.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Percival, W. J.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Sako, M.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Scolnic, D.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Yanny, B.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-12-17, last modified: 2018-12-14
We define and characterise a sample of 1.3 million galaxies extracted from
the first year of Dark Energy Survey data, optimised to measure Baryon Acoustic
Oscillations in the presence of significant redshift uncertainties. The sample
is dominated by luminous red galaxies located at redshifts $z \gtrsim 0.6$. We
define the exact selection using color and magnitude cuts that balance the need
of high number densities and small photometric redshift uncertainties, using
the corresponding forecasted BAO distance error as a figure-of-merit in the
process. The typical photo-$z$ uncertainty varies from $2.3\%$ to $3.6\%$ (in
units of 1+$z$) from $z=0.6$ to $1$, with number densities from $200$ to $130$
galaxies per deg$^2$ in tomographic bins of width $\Delta z = 0.1$. Next we
summarise the validation of the photometric redshift estimation. We
characterise and mitigate observational systematics including stellar
contamination, and show that the clustering on large scales is robust in front
of those contaminants. We show that the clustering signal in the
auto-correlations and cross-correlations is generally consistent with
theoretical models, which serves as an additional test of the redshift
distributions.
[9]
oai:arXiv.org:1712.06209 [pdf] - 1794662
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Measurement of the Baryon Acoustic
Oscillation scale in the distribution of galaxies to redshift 1
The Dark Energy Survey Collaboration;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Alarcon, A.;
Allam, S.;
Andrade-Oliveira, F.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Banerji, M.;
Banik, N.;
Bechtol, K.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bernstein, R. A.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Camacho, H.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chan, K. C.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
Garcia-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kent, S.;
Kokron, N.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lacasa, F.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Manera, M.;
Marriner, J.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Neilsen, E.;
Percival, W. J.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Porredon, A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Rosenfeld, R.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sako, M.;
Sanchez, E.;
Santiago, B.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, R. C.;
Smith, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Yanny, B.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-12-17, last modified: 2018-12-09
We present angular diameter distance measurements obtained by locating the
BAO scale in the distribution of galaxies selected from the first year of Dark
Energy Survey data. We consider a sample of over 1.3 million galaxies
distributed over a footprint of 1318 deg$^2$ with $0.6 < z_{\rm photo} < 1$ and
a typical redshift uncertainty of $0.03(1+z)$. This sample was selected, as
fully described in a companion paper, using a color/magnitude selection that
optimizes trade-offs between number density and redshift uncertainty. We
investigate the BAO signal in the projected clustering using three conventions,
the angular separation, the co-moving transverse separation, and spherical
harmonics. Further, we compare results obtained from template based and machine
learning photometric redshift determinations. We use 1800 simulations that
approximate our sample in order to produce covariance matrices and allow us to
validate our distance scale measurement methodology. We measure the angular
diameter distance, $D_A$, at the effective redshift of our sample divided by
the true physical scale of the BAO feature, $r_{\rm d}$. We obtain close to a 4
per cent distance measurement of $D_A(z_{\rm eff}=0.81)/r_{\rm d} = 10.75\pm
0.43 $. These results are consistent with the flat $\Lambda$CDM concordance
cosmological model supported by numerous other recent experimental results. All
data products are publicly available here:
https://des.ncsa.illinois.edu/releases/y1a1/bao
[10]
oai:arXiv.org:1803.09795 [pdf] - 1785791
DES Y1 Results: Validating cosmological parameter estimation using
simulated Dark Energy Surveys
MacCrann, N.;
DeRose, J.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Blazek, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Crocce, M.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Becker, M. R.;
Jain, B.;
Krause, E.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Gruen, D.;
Zuntz, J.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Prat, J.;
Wang, M.;
Dodelson, S.;
Kravtsov, A.;
Fosalba, P.;
Busha, M. T.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Huterer, D.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Kirk, D.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.
Submitted: 2018-03-26, last modified: 2018-11-14
We use mock galaxy survey simulations designed to resemble the Dark Energy
Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) data to validate and inform cosmological parameter
estimation. When similar analysis tools are applied to both simulations and
real survey data, they provide powerful validation tests of the DES Y1
cosmological analyses presented in companion papers. We use two suites of
galaxy simulations produced using different methods, which therefore provide
independent tests of our cosmological parameter inference. The cosmological
analysis we aim to validate is presented in DES Collaboration et al. (2017) and
uses angular two-point correlation functions of galaxy number counts and weak
lensing shear, as well as their cross-correlation, in multiple redshift bins.
While our constraints depend on the specific set of simulated realisations
available, for both suites of simulations we find that the input cosmology is
consistent with the combined constraints from multiple simulated DES Y1
realizations in the $\Omega_m-\sigma_8$ plane. For one of the suites, we are
able to show with high confidence that any biases in the inferred
$S_8=\sigma_8(\Omega_m/0.3)^{0.5}$ and $\Omega_m$ are smaller than the DES Y1
$1-\sigma$ uncertainties. For the other suite, for which we have fewer
realizations, we are unable to be this conclusive; we infer a roughly 70%
probability that systematic biases in the recovered $\Omega_m$ and $S_8$ are
sub-dominant to the DES Y1 uncertainty. As cosmological analyses of this kind
become increasingly more precise, validation of parameter inference using
survey simulations will be essential to demonstrate robustness.
[11]
oai:arXiv.org:1810.02322 [pdf] - 1924924
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Joint Analysis of Galaxy Clustering,
Galaxy Lensing, and CMB Lensing Two-point Functions
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Alarcon, A.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Aylor, K.;
Banerji, M.;
Banik, N.;
Baxter, E. J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Becker, M. R.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Bianchini, F.;
Blazek, J.;
Bleem, L.;
Bleem, L. E.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Carlstrom, J. E.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chang, C.;
Chang, C. L.;
Cho, H-M.;
Choi, A.;
Chown, R.;
Crawford, T. M.;
Crites, A. T.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
de Haan, T.;
DeRose, J.;
Desai, S.;
De Vicente, J.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dobbs, M. A.;
Dodelson, S.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Everett, W. B.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Friedrich, O.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gatti, M.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
George, E. M.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Halverson, N. W.;
Harrington, N. L.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Holder, G. P.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Holzapfel, W. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hou, Z.;
Hoyle, B.;
Hrubes, J. D.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kent, S.;
Kirk, D.;
Knox, L.;
Kokron, N.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Lahav, O.;
Lee, A. T.;
Leitch, E. M.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Luong-Van, D.;
MacCrann, N.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Manzotti, A.;
Marrone, D. P.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
McMahon, J. J.;
Menanteau, F.;
Meyer, S. S.;
Miquel, R.;
Mocanu, L. M.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Muir, J.;
Natoli, T.;
Nicola, A.;
Nord, B.;
Omori, Y.;
Padin, S.;
Pandey, S.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Porredon, A.;
Prat, J.;
Pryke, C.;
Rau, M. M.;
Reichardt, C. L.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Ruhl, J. E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sanchez, E.;
Sayre, J. T.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schaffer, K. K.;
Secco, L. F.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sheldon, E.;
Shirokoff, E.;
Simard, G.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Staniszewski, Z.;
Stark, A. A.;
Story, K. T.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Vanderlinde, K.;
Vieira, J. D.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Williamson, R.;
Wu, W. L. K.;
Yanny, B.;
Zahn, O.;
Zhang, Y.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2018-10-04
We perform a joint analysis of the auto and cross-correlations between three
cosmic fields: the galaxy density field, the galaxy weak lensing shear field,
and the cosmic microwave background (CMB) weak lensing convergence field. These
three fields are measured using roughly 1300 sq. deg. of overlapping optical
imaging data from first year observations of the Dark Energy Survey and
millimeter-wave observations of the CMB from both the South Pole Telescope
Sunyaev-Zel'dovich survey and Planck. We present cosmological constraints from
the joint analysis of the two-point correlation functions between galaxy
density and galaxy shear with CMB lensing. We test for consistency between
these measurements and the DES-only two-point function measurements, finding no
evidence for inconsistency in the context of flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmological
models. Performing a joint analysis of five of the possible correlation
functions between these fields (excluding only the CMB lensing autospectrum)
yields $S_{8}\equiv \sigma_8\sqrt{\Omega_{\rm m}/0.3} =
0.782^{+0.019}_{-0.025}$ and $\Omega_{\rm m}=0.260^{+0.029}_{-0.019}$. We test
for consistency between these five correlation function measurements and the
Planck-only measurement of the CMB lensing autospectrum, again finding no
evidence for inconsistency in the context of flat $\Lambda$CDM models.
Combining constraints from all six two-point functions yields
$S_{8}=0.776^{+0.014}_{-0.021}$ and $\Omega_{\rm m}= 0.271^{+0.022}_{-0.016}$.
These results provide a powerful test and confirmation of the results from the
first year DES joint-probes analysis.
[12]
oai:arXiv.org:1810.02342 [pdf] - 1929685
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: tomographic cross-correlations
between DES galaxies and CMB lensing from SPT+Planck
Omori, Y.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Porredon, A.;
Baxter, E.;
Chang, C.;
Crocce, M.;
Fosalba, P.;
Alarcon, A.;
Banik, N.;
Blazek, J.;
Bleem, L. E.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Cawthon, R.;
Choi, A.;
Chown, R.;
Crawford, T.;
Dodelson, S.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Friedrich, O.;
Gruen, D.;
Holder, G. P.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
Jarvis, M.;
Kirk, D.;
Kokron, N.;
Krause, E.;
MacCrann, N.;
Muir, J.;
Prat, J.;
Reichardt, C. L.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Secco, L. F.;
Simard, G.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Avila, S.;
Aylor, K.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Bianchini, F.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Carlstrom, J. E.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Chang, C. L.;
Cho, H-M.;
Crites, A. T.;
Cunha, C. E.;
da Costa, L. N.;
de Haan, T.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dobbs, M. A.;
Everett, W. B.;
Doel, P.;
Estrada, J.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
George, E. M.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Halverson, N. W.;
Harrington, N. L.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Holzapfel, W. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hou, Z.;
Hoyle, B.;
Hrubes, J. D.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lee, A. T.;
Leitch, E. M.;
Lima, M.;
Luong-Van, D.;
Manzotti, A.;
Marrone, D. P.;
Marshall, J. L.;
McMahon, J. J.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Meyer, S. S.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Mocanu, L. M.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Natoli, T.;
Padin, S.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Pryke, C.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Ruhl, J. E.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schaffer, K. K.;
Schubnell, M.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Shirokoff, E.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Staniszewski, Z.;
Stark, A. A.;
Story, K. T.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Vanderlinde, K.;
Vieira, J. D.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wu, W. L. K.;
Zahn, O.
Submitted: 2018-10-04
We measure the cross-correlation between redMaGiC galaxies selected from the
Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year-1 data and gravitational lensing of the cosmic
microwave background (CMB) reconstructed from South Pole Telescope (SPT) and
Planck data over 1289 sq. deg. When combining measurements across multiple
galaxy redshift bins spanning the redshift range of $0.15<z<0.90$, we reject
the hypothesis of no correlation at 19.9$\sigma$ significance. When removing
small-scale data points where thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich signal and nonlinear
galaxy bias could potentially bias our results, the detection significance is
reduced to 9.9$\sigma$. We perform a joint analysis of galaxy-CMB lensing
cross-correlations and galaxy clustering to constrain cosmology, finding
$\Omega_{\rm m} = 0.276^{+0.029}_{-0.030}$ and
$S_{8}=\sigma_{8}\sqrt{\mathstrut \Omega_{\rm m}/0.3} =
0.800^{+0.090}_{-0.094}$. We also perform two alternate analyses aimed at
constraining only the growth rate of cosmic structure as a function of
redshift, finding consistency with predictions from the concordance
$\Lambda$CDM model. The measurements presented here are part of a joint
cosmological analysis that combines galaxy clustering, galaxy lensing and CMB
lensing using data from DES, SPT and Planck.
[13]
oai:arXiv.org:1712.07298 [pdf] - 1760974
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Calibration of redMaGiC Redshift
Distributions in DES and SDSS from Cross-Correlations
Cawthon, R.;
Davis, C.;
Gatti, M.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Rozo, E.;
Frieman, J.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Alarcon, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bonnett, C.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Castander, F. J.;
Chang, C.;
da Costa, L. N.;
De Vicente, J.;
DeRose, J.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruen, D.;
Gschwend, J.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hoyle, B.;
Lin, H.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Miquel, R.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Rau, M. M.;
Roodman, A.;
Ross, A. J.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Banerji, M.;
Bechtol, K.;
Bernstein, R. A.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hollowood, D.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Walker, A. R.
Submitted: 2017-12-19, last modified: 2018-10-03
We present calibrations of the redshift distributions of redMaGiC galaxies in
the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) and Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) DR8
data. These results determine the priors of the redshift distribution of
redMaGiC galaxies, which were used for galaxy clustering measurements and as
lenses for galaxy-galaxy lensing measurements in DES Y1 cosmological analyses.
We empirically determine the bias in redMaGiC photometric redshift estimates
using angular cross-correlations with Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey
(BOSS) galaxies. For DES, we calibrate a single parameter redshift bias in
three photometric redshift bins: $z \in[0.15,0.3]$, [0.3,0.45], and [0.45,0.6].
Our best fit results in each bin give photometric redshift biases of $|\Delta
z|<0.01$. To further test the redMaGiC algorithm, we apply our calibration
procedure to SDSS redMaGiC galaxies, where the statistical precision of the
cross-correlation measurement is much higher due to a greater overlap with BOSS
galaxies. For SDSS, we also find best fit results of $|\Delta z|<0.01$. We
compare our results to other analyses of redMaGiC photometric redshifts.
[14]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01537 [pdf] - 1743609
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Galaxy-Galaxy Lensing
Prat, J.;
Sánchez, C.;
Fang, Y.;
Gruen, D.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Kokron, N.;
Secco, L. F.;
Jain, B.;
Miquel, R.;
MacCrann, N.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Alarcon, A.;
Bacon, D.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Blazek, J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chang, C.;
Crocce, M.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Friedrich, O.;
Gatti, M.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huff, E. M.;
Jarvis, M.;
Rau, M. M.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sheldon, E.;
Varga, T. N.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dodelson, S.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Goldstein, D. A.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kirk, D.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Lahav, O.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sako, M.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Yanny, B.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2018-09-04
We present galaxy-galaxy lensing measurements from 1321 sq. deg. of the Dark
Energy Survey (DES) Year 1 (Y1) data. The lens sample consists of a selection
of 660,000 red galaxies with high-precision photometric redshifts, known as
redMaGiC, split into five tomographic bins in the redshift range $0.15 < z <
0.9$. We use two different source samples, obtained from the Metacalibration
(26 million galaxies) and Im3shape (18 million galaxies) shear estimation
codes, which are split into four photometric redshift bins in the range $0.2 <
z < 1.3$. We perform extensive testing of potential systematic effects that can
bias the galaxy-galaxy lensing signal, including those from shear estimation,
photometric redshifts, and observational properties. Covariances are obtained
from jackknife subsamples of the data and validated with a suite of log-normal
simulations. We use the shear-ratio geometric test to obtain independent
constraints on the mean of the source redshift distributions, providing
validation of those obtained from other photo-$z$ studies with the same data.
We find consistency between the galaxy bias estimates obtained from our
galaxy-galaxy lensing measurements and from galaxy clustering, therefore
showing the galaxy-matter cross-correlation coefficient $r$ to be consistent
with one, measured over the scales used for the cosmological analysis. The
results in this work present one of the three two-point correlation functions,
along with galaxy clustering and cosmic shear, used in the DES cosmological
analysis of Y1 data, and hence the methodology and the systematics tests
presented here provide a critical input for that study as well as for future
cosmological analyses in DES and other photometric galaxy surveys.
[15]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01536 [pdf] - 1747811
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Galaxy clustering for combined probes
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Crocce, M.;
Ross, A. J.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Avila, S.;
Banik, N.;
Blazek, J.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Cawthon, R.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Friedrich, O.;
Kokron, N.;
Krause, E.;
MacCrann, N.;
Prat, J.;
Sanchez, C.;
Secco, L. F.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Asorey, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Becker, M. R.;
Benoit-Levy, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Carollo, D.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cunha, C. E.;
DAndrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, T. M.;
Davis, C.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dodelson, S.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
Garcia-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Glazebrook, K.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hinton, S. R.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoormann, J. K.;
Jain, B.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
King, A.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lewis, G.;
Li, T. S.;
Lidman, C.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Macaulay, E.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Moller, A.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
ONeill, C. R.;
Percival, W. J.;
Petravick, D.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Sako, M.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Sommer, N. E.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, B. E.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Uddin, S. A.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Weller, J.;
Wester, W.;
Wolf, R. C.;
Yuan, F.;
Zhang, B.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2018-08-28
We measure the clustering of DES Year 1 galaxies that are intended to be
combined with weak lensing samples in order to produce precise cosmological
constraints from the joint analysis of large-scale structure and lensing
correlations. Two-point correlation functions are measured for a sample of $6.6
\times 10^{5}$ luminous red galaxies selected using the \textsc{redMaGiC}
algorithm over an area of $1321$ square degrees, in the redshift range $0.15 <
z < 0.9$, split into five tomographic redshift bins. The sample has a mean
redshift uncertainty of $\sigma_{z}/(1+z) = 0.017$. We quantify and correct
spurious correlations induced by spatially variable survey properties, testing
their impact on the clustering measurements and covariance. We demonstrate the
sample's robustness by testing for stellar contamination, for potential biases
that could arise from the systematic correction, and for the consistency
between the two-point auto- and cross-correlation functions. We show that the
corrections we apply have a significant impact on the resultant measurement of
cosmological parameters, but that the results are robust against arbitrary
choices in the correction method. We find the linear galaxy bias in each
redshift bin in a fiducial cosmology to be $b(z$=$0.24)=1.40 \pm 0.08$,
$b(z$=$0.38)=1.61 \pm 0.05$, $b(z$=$0.53)=1.60 \pm 0.04$ for galaxies with
luminosities $L/L_*>$$0.5$, $b(z$=$0.68)=1.93 \pm 0.05$ for $L/L_*>$$1$ and
$b(z$=$0.83)=1.99 \pm 0.07$ for $L/L_*$$>1.5$, broadly consistent with
expectations for the redshift and luminosity dependence of the bias of red
galaxies. We show these measurements to be consistent with the linear bias
obtained from tangential shear measurements.
[16]
oai:arXiv.org:1801.04390 [pdf] - 1735289
BAO from angular clustering: optimization and mitigation of theoretical
systematics
Chan, K. C.;
Crocce, M.;
Ross, A. J.;
Avila, S.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Manera, M.;
Percival, W. J.;
Rosenfeld, R.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Estrada, J.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
James, D. J.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Reil, K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Walker, A. R.
Submitted: 2018-01-13, last modified: 2018-08-20
We study the methodology and potential theoretical systematics of measuring
Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) using the angular correlation functions in
tomographic bins. We calibrate and optimize the pipeline for the Dark Energy
Survey Year 1 dataset using 1800 mocks. We compare the BAO fitting results
obtained with three estimators: the Maximum Likelihood Estimator (MLE), Profile
Likelihood, and Markov Chain Monte Carlo. The fit results from the MLE are the
least biased and their derived 1-$\sigma$ error bar are closest to the Gaussian
distribution value after removing the extreme mocks with non-detected BAO
signal. We show that incorrect assumptions in constructing the template, such
as mismatches from the cosmology of the mocks or the underlying photo-$z$
errors, can lead to BAO angular shifts. We find that MLE is the method that
best traces this systematic biases, allowing to recover the true angular
distance values. In a real survey analysis, it may happen that the final data
sample properties are slightly different from those of the mock catalog. We
show that the effect on the mock covariance due to the sample differences can
be corrected with the help of the Gaussian covariance matrix or more
effectively using the eigenmode expansion of the mock covariance. In the
eigenmode expansion, the eigenmodes are provided by some proxy covariance
matrix. The eigenmode expansion is significantly less susceptible to
statistical fluctuations relative to the direct measurements of the covariance
matrix because of the number of free parameters is substantially reduced
[17]
oai:arXiv.org:1710.05045 [pdf] - 1722433
Density split statistics: Cosmological constraints from counts and
lensing in cells in DES Y1 and SDSS data
Gruen, D.;
Friedrich, O.;
Krause, E.;
DeRose, J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Davis, C.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Alarcon, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Blazek, J.;
Chang, C.;
Clampitt, J.;
Crocce, M.;
De Vicente, J.;
Gatti, M.;
Gill, M. S. S.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hilbert, S.;
Hoyle, B.;
Jain, B.;
Jarvis, M.;
Lahav, O.;
MacCrann, N.;
McClintock, T.;
Prat, J.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sheldon, E.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bertin, E.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-10-13, last modified: 2018-07-24
We derive cosmological constraints from the probability distribution function
(PDF) of evolved large-scale matter density fluctuations. We do this by
splitting lines of sight by density based on their count of tracer galaxies,
and by measuring both gravitational shear around and counts-in-cells in
overdense and underdense lines of sight, in Dark Energy Survey (DES) First Year
and Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) data. Our analysis uses a perturbation
theory model (see companion paper Friedrich at al.) and is validated using
N-body simulation realizations and log-normal mocks. It allows us to constrain
cosmology, bias and stochasticity of galaxies w.r.t. matter density and, in
addition, the skewness of the matter density field.
From a Bayesian model comparison, we find that the data weakly prefer a
connection of galaxies and matter that is stochastic beyond Poisson
fluctuations on <=20 arcmin angular smoothing scale. The two stochasticity
models we fit yield DES constraints on the matter density
$\Omega_m=0.26^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ and $\Omega_m=0.28^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ that are
consistent with each other. These values also agree with the DES analysis of
galaxy and shear two-point functions (3x2pt) that only uses second moments of
the PDF. Constraints on $\sigma_8$ are model dependent
($\sigma_8=0.97^{+0.07}_{-0.06}$ and $0.80^{+0.06}_{-0.07}$ for the two
stochasticity models), but consistent with each other and with the 3x2pt
results if stochasticity is at the low end of the posterior range.
As an additional test of gravity, counts and lensing in cells allow to
compare the skewness $S_3$ of the matter density PDF to its LCDM prediction. We
find no evidence of excess skewness in any model or data set, with better than
25 per cent relative precision in the skewness estimate from DES alone.
[18]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01538 [pdf] - 1747812
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cosmological Constraints from Cosmic
Shear
Troxel, M. A.;
MacCrann, N.;
Zuntz, J.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Krause, E.;
Dodelson, S.;
Gruen, D.;
Blazek, J.;
Friedrich, O.;
Samuroff, S.;
Prat, J.;
Secco, L. F.;
Davis, C.;
Ferté, A.;
DeRose, J.;
Alarcon, A.;
Amara, A.;
Baxter, E.;
Becker, M. R.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chang, C.;
Choi, A.;
De Vicente, J.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Frieman, J.;
Gatti, M.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huff, E. M.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
Jarvis, M.;
Kacprzak, T.;
Kirk, D.;
Kokron, N.;
Krawiec, C.;
Lahav, O.;
Liddle, A. R.;
Peacock, J.;
Rau, M. M.;
Refregier, A.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sheldon, E.;
Stebbins, A.;
Varga, T. N.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Wang, M.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Yanny, B.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Goldstein, D. A.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kent, S.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Neilsen, E.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Petravick, D.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sako, M.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2018-04-30
We use 26 million galaxies from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 1 shape
catalogs over 1321 deg$^2$ of the sky to produce the most significant
measurement of cosmic shear in a galaxy survey to date. We constrain
cosmological parameters in both the flat $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM models, while
also varying the neutrino mass density. These results are shown to be robust
using two independent shape catalogs, two independent \photoz\ calibration
methods, and two independent analysis pipelines in a blind analysis. We find a
3.5\% fractional uncertainty on $\sigma_8(\Omega_m/0.3)^{0.5} =
0.782^{+0.027}_{-0.027}$ at 68\% CL, which is a factor of 2.5 improvement over
the fractional constraining power of our DES Science Verification results. In
$w$CDM, we find a 4.8\% fractional uncertainty on $\sigma_8(\Omega_m/0.3)^{0.5}
= 0.777^{+0.036}_{-0.038}$ and a dark energy equation-of-state
$w=-0.95^{+0.33}_{-0.39}$. We find results that are consistent with previous
cosmic shear constraints in $\sigma_8$ -- $\Omega_m$, and see no evidence for
disagreement of our weak lensing data with data from the CMB. Finally, we find
no evidence preferring a $w$CDM model allowing $w\ne -1$. We expect further
significant improvements with subsequent years of DES data, which will more
than triple the sky coverage of our shape catalogs and double the effective
integrated exposure time per galaxy.
[19]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01535 [pdf] - 1637501
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Curved-Sky Weak Lensing Mass Map
Chang, C.;
Pujol, A.;
Mawdsley, B.;
Bacon, D.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Melchior, P.;
Kovács, A.;
Jain, B.;
Leistedt, B.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Alarcon, A.;
Baxter, E.;
Bechtol, K.;
Becker, M. R.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bonnett, C.;
Busha, M. T.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DeRose, J.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Fosalba, P.;
Gatti, M.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gruen, D.;
Gschwend, J.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huff, E. M.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeffrey, N.;
Kacprzak, T.;
Lin, H.;
MacCrann, N.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Prat, J.;
Rau, M. M.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Roodman, A.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sheldon, E.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Varga, T. N.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Vikram, V.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Estrada, J.;
Neto, A. Fausti;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kent, S.;
Kirk, D.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Lahav, O.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Martini, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Neilsen, E.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Petravick, D.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Sako, M.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wester, W.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2017-12-19
We construct the largest curved-sky galaxy weak lensing mass map to date from
the DES first-year (DES Y1) data. The map, about 10 times larger than previous
work, is constructed over a contiguous $\approx1,500 $deg$^2$, covering a
comoving volume of $\approx10 $Gpc$^3$. The effects of masking, sampling, and
noise are tested using simulations. We generate weak lensing maps from two DES
Y1 shear catalogs, Metacalibration and Im3shape, with sources at redshift
$0.2<z<1.3,$ and in each of four bins in this range. In the highest
signal-to-noise map, the ratio between the mean signal-to-noise in the E-mode
and the B-mode map is $\sim$1.5 ($\sim$2) when smoothed with a Gaussian filter
of $\sigma_{G}=30$ (80) arcminutes. The second and third moments of the
convergence $\kappa$ in the maps are in agreement with simulations. We also
find no significant correlation of $\kappa$ with maps of potential systematic
contaminants. Finally, we demonstrate two applications of the mass maps: (1)
cross-correlation with different foreground tracers of mass and (2) exploration
of the largest peaks and voids in the maps.
[20]
oai:arXiv.org:1705.05442 [pdf] - 1583447
Optimized Clustering Estimators for BAO Measurements Accounting for
Significant Redshift Uncertainty
Ross, Ashley J.;
Banik, Nilanjan;
Avila, Santiago;
Percival, Will J.;
Dodelson, Scott;
Garcia-Bellido, Juan;
Crocce, Martin;
Elvin-Poole, Jack;
Giannantonio, Tommaso;
Manera, Marc;
Sevilla-Noarbe, Ignacio
Submitted: 2017-05-15, last modified: 2017-11-20
We determine an optimized clustering statistic to be used for galaxy samples
with significant redshift uncertainty, such as those that rely on photometric
redshifts. To do so, we study the baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) information
content as a function of the orientation of galaxy clustering modes with
respect to their angle to the line-of-sight (LOS). The clustering along the
LOS, as observed in a redshift-space with significant redshift uncertainty, has
contributions from clustering modes with a range of orientations with respect
to the true LOS. For redshift uncertainty $\sigma_z \geq 0.02(1+z)$ we find
that while the BAO information is confined to transverse clustering modes in
the true space, it is spread nearly evenly in the observed space. Thus,
measuring clustering in terms of the projected separation (regardless of the
LOS) is an efficient and nearly lossless compression of the signal for
$\sigma_z \geq 0.02(1+z)$. For reduced redshift uncertainty, a more careful
consideration is required. We then use more than 1700 realizations (combining
two separate sets) of galaxy simulations mimicking the Dark Energy Survey Year
1 sample to validate our analytic results and optimized analysis procedure. We
find that using the correlation function binned in projected separation, we can
achieve uncertainties that are within 10 per cent of those predicted by Fisher
matrix forecasts. We predict that DES Y1 should achieve a 5 per cent distance
measurement using our optimized methods. We expect the results presented here
to be important for any future BAO measurements made using photometric redshift
data.
[21]
oai:arXiv.org:1710.02517 [pdf] - 1589408
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cross-Correlation Redshifts in the
DES -- Calibration of the Weak Lensing Source Redshift Distributions
Davis, C.;
Gatti, M.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Cawthon, R.;
Rozo, E.;
Alarcon, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bonnett, C.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Castander, F. J.;
Chang, C.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, T. M.;
De Vicente, J.;
DeRose, J.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Elvin-Poole, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gruen, D.;
Gschwend, J.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hoyle, B.;
Lin, H.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Miquel, R.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Rau, M. M.;
Roodman, A.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Burke, D. L.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Krause, E.;
Kron, R.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Menanteau, F.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2017-10-06
We present the calibration of the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) weak
lensing source galaxy redshift distributions from clustering measurements. By
cross-correlating the positions of source galaxies with luminous red galaxies
selected by the redMaGiC algorithm we measure the redshift distributions of the
source galaxies as placed into different tomographic bins. These measurements
constrain any such shifts to an accuracy of $\sim0.02$ and can be computed even
when the clustering measurements do not span the full redshift range. The
highest-redshift source bin is not constrained by the clustering measurements
because of the minimal redshift overlap with the redMaGiC galaxies. We compare
our constraints with those obtained from $\texttt{COSMOS}$ 30-band photometry
and find that our two very different methods produce consistent constraints.
[22]
oai:arXiv.org:1607.00032 [pdf] - 1528091
A Combined View of Sterile-Neutrino Constraints from CMB and Neutrino
Oscillation Measurements
Submitted: 2016-06-30, last modified: 2016-11-25
We perform a comparative analysis of constraints on sterile neutrinos from
the Planck experiment and from current and future neutrino oscillation
experiments (MINOS, IceCube, SBN). For the first time, we express the Planck
constraints on $N_{\rm eff}$ and $m_{\rm eff}^{\rm sterile}$ from the Cosmic
Microwave Background in the parameter space used by oscillation experiments
using both mass-squared differences and mixing angles. In a model with a single
sterile neutrino species and using standard assumptions, we find that the
Planck data and the oscillation experiments measuring muon-neutrino
disappearance have similar sensitivity.