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

Porredon, A.

Normalized to: Porredon, A.

6 article(s) in total. 287 co-authors, from 1 to 7 common article(s). Median position in authors list is 100,5.

[1]  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.
Comments: 8 pages, 2 figures; v3 matches version accepted by PRL
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.
[2]  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.
Comments: Matches published version. Results essentially unchanged, except updated covariance matrix leads to improved chi^2 (colored text removed)
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 ...
[3]  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.
Comments: accepted by MNRAS; main results unchanged, some restructuring, clarifications, and robustness tests added based on referee's comments; all data products are publicly available here: https://des.ncsa.illinois.edu/releases/y1a1/bao
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
[4]  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.
Comments: 20 pages, 7 figures
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.
[5]  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.
Comments: 17 pages, 7 figures
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.
[6]  oai:arXiv.org:1706.09359  [pdf] - 1585253
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Multi-Probe Methodology and Simulated Likelihood Analyses
Comments:
Submitted: 2017-06-28
We present the methodology for and detail the implementation of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) 3x2pt DES Year 1 (Y1) analysis, which combines configuration-space two-point statistics from three different cosmological probes: cosmic shear, galaxy-galaxy lensing, and galaxy clustering, using data from the first year of DES observations. We have developed two independent modeling pipelines and describe the code validation process. We derive expressions for analytical real-space multi-probe covariances, and describe their validation with numerical simulations. We stress-test the inference pipelines in simulated likelihood analyses that vary 6-7 cosmology parameters plus 20 nuisance parameters and precisely resemble the analysis to be presented in the DES 3x2pt analysis paper, using a variety of simulated input data vectors with varying assumptions. We find that any disagreement between pipelines leads to changes in assigned likelihood $\Delta \chi^2 \le 0.045$ with respect to the statistical error of the DES Y1 data vector. We also find that angular binning and survey mask do not impact our analytic covariance at a significant level. We determine lower bounds on scales used for analysis of galaxy clustering (8 Mpc$~h^{-1}$) and galaxy-galaxy lensing (12 Mpc$~h^{-1}$) such that the impact of modeling uncertainties in the non-linear regime is well below statistical errors, and show that our analysis choices are robust against a variety of systematics. These tests demonstrate that we have a robust analysis pipeline that yields unbiased cosmological parameter inferences for the flagship 3x2pt DES Y1 analysis. We emphasize that the level of independent code development and subsequent code comparison as demonstrated in this paper is necessary to produce credible constraints from increasingly complex multi-probe analyses of current data.