Normalized to: Prat, J.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:2006.04294 [pdf] - 2109338
Shadows in the Dark: Low-Surface-Brightness Galaxies Discovered in the
Dark Energy Survey
Tanoglidis, D.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Wei, K.;
Li, T. S.;
Sánchez, F. J.;
Zhang, Y.;
Peter, A. H. G.;
Feldmeier-Krause, A.;
Prat, J.;
Casey, K.;
Palmese, A.;
Sánchez, C.;
DeRose, J.;
Conselice, C.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Aguena, M.;
Allam, S.;
Avila, S.;
Bechtol, K.;
Bertin, E.;
Bhargava, S.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Chang, C.;
Costanzi, M.;
da Costa, L. N.;
De Vicente, J.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Everett, S.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Huterer, D.;
James, D. J.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Paz-Chinchón, F.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Suchyta, E.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Tucker, D. L.;
Walker, A. R.
Submitted: 2020-06-07
We present a catalog of 20,977 extended low-surface-brightness galaxies
(LSBGs) identified in ~ 5000 deg$^2$ from the first three years of imaging data
from the Dark Energy Survey (DES). Based on a single-component S\'ersic model
fit, we define extended LSBGs as galaxies with $g$-band effective radii
$R_{\scriptsize{eff}} > 2.5"$ and mean surface brightness
$\bar{\mu}_{\scriptsize{eff}}(g) > 24.3$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$. We find that the
distribution of LSBGs is strongly bimodal in $(g-r)$ vs. $(g-i$) color space.
We divide our sample into red ($g-i \geq 0.59$) and blue ($g-i<0.59$) galaxies
and study the properties of the two populations. Redder LSBGs are more
clustered than their blue counterparts, and are correlated with the
distribution of nearby ($z < 0.10$) bright galaxies. Red LSBGs constitute $\sim
35\%$ of our LSBG sample, and $\sim 30\%$ of these are located within 1 deg of
low-redshift galaxy groups and clusters (compared to $\sim 8\%$ of the blue
LSBGs). For nine of the most prominent galaxy groups and clusters, we calculate
the physical properties of associated LSBGs assuming a redshift derived from
the host system. In these systems, we identify 108 objects that can be
classified as ultra-diffuse galaxies, defined as LSBGs with projected physical
effective radii $R_{\scriptsize{eff}} > 1.5$ kpc. The wide-area sample of LSBGs
in DES can be used to test the role of environment on models of LSBG formation
and evolution.
[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:1909.01386 [pdf] - 1996113
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 results: The relationship between mass and
light around cosmic voids
Fang, Y.;
Hamaus, N.;
Jain, B.;
Pandey, S.;
Pollina, G.;
Sánchez, C.;
Kovács, A.;
Chang, C.;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Choi, A.;
Crocce, M.;
DeRose, J.;
Fosalba, P.;
Gatti, M.;
Gaztañaga, E.;
Gruen, D.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hoyle, B.;
MacCrann, N.;
Prat, J.;
Rau, M. M.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sheldon, E.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Zuntz, J.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Cawthon, R.;
da Costa, L. N.;
De Vicente, J.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Everett, S.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Palmese, A.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.
Submitted: 2019-09-03, last modified: 2019-11-11
What are the mass and galaxy profiles of cosmic voids? In this paper we use
two methods to extract voids in the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 1 redMaGiC
galaxy sample to address this question. We use either 2D slices in projection,
or the 3D distribution of galaxies based on photometric redshifts to identify
voids. For the mass profile, we measure the tangential shear profiles of
background galaxies to infer the excess surface mass density. The
signal-to-noise ratio for our lensing measurement ranges between 10.7 and 14.0
for the two void samples. We infer their 3D density profiles by fitting models
based on N-body simulations and find good agreement for void radii in the range
15-85 Mpc. Comparison with their galaxy profiles then allows us to test the
relation between mass and light at the 10%-level, the most stringent test to
date. We find very similar shapes for the two profiles, consistent with a
linear relationship between mass and light both within and outside the void
radius. We validate our analysis with the help of simulated mock catalogues and
estimate the impact of photometric redshift uncertainties on the measurement.
Our methodology can be used for cosmological applications, including tests of
gravity with voids. This is especially promising when the lensing profiles are
combined with spectroscopic measurements of void dynamics via redshift-space
distortions.
[4]
oai:arXiv.org:1811.06989 [pdf] - 1953361
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Constraints on Intrinsic Alignments
and their Colour Dependence from Galaxy Clustering and Weak Lensing
Samuroff, S.;
Blazek, J.;
Troxel, M. A.;
MacCrann, N.;
Krause, E.;
Leonard, C. D.;
Prat, J.;
Gruen, D.;
Dodelson, S.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Gatti, M.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hoyle, B.;
Larsen, P.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
Cunha, C. E.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sheldon, E.;
Smith, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Vikram, V.
Submitted: 2018-11-16, last modified: 2019-08-06
We perform a joint analysis of intrinsic alignments and cosmology using
tomographic weak lensing, galaxy clustering and galaxy-galaxy lensing
measurements from Year 1 (Y1) of the Dark Energy Survey. We define early- and
late-type subsamples, which are found to pass a series of systematics tests,
including for spurious photometric redshift error and point spread function
correlations. We analyse these split data alongside the fiducial mixed Y1
sample using a range of intrinsic alignment models. In a fiducial Nonlinear
Alignment Model (NLA) analysis, assuming a flat \lcdm~cosmology, we find a
significant difference in intrinsic alignment amplitude, with early-type
galaxies favouring $A_\mathrm{IA} = 2.38^{+0.32}_{-0.31}$ and late-type
galaxies consistent with no intrinsic alignments at $0.05^{+0.10}_{-0.09}$. We
find weak evidence of a diminishing alignment amplitude at higher redshifts in
the early-type sample. The analysis is repeated using a number of extended
model spaces, including a physically motivated model that includes both tidal
torquing and tidal alignment mechanisms. In multiprobe likelihood chains in
which cosmology, intrinsic alignments in both galaxy samples and all other
relevant systematics are varied simultaneously, we find the tidal alignment and
tidal torquing parts of the intrinsic alignment signal have amplitudes $A_1 =
2.66 ^{+0.67}_{-0.66}$, $A_2=-2.94^{+1.94}_{-1.83}$, respectively, for
early-type galaxies and $A_1 = 0.62 ^{+0.41}_{-0.41}$, $A_2 =
-2.26^{+1.30}_{-1.16}$ for late-type galaxies. In the full (mixed) Y1 sample
the best constraints are $A_1 = 0.70 ^{+0.41}_{-0.38}$, $A_2 = -1.36
^{+1.08}_{-1.41}$. For all galaxy splits and IA models considered, we report
cosmological parameter constraints that are consistent with the results of
Troxel et al. (2017) and Dark Energy Survey Collaboration (2017).
[5]
oai:arXiv.org:1810.02212 [pdf] - 1922933
Cosmological lensing ratios with DES Y1, SPT and Planck
Prat, J.;
Baxter, E. J.;
Shin, T.;
Sánchez, C.;
Chang, C.;
Jain, B.;
Miquel, R.;
Alarcon, A.;
Bacon, D.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Cawthon, R.;
Crawford, T. M.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
Dodelson, S.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Friedrich, O.;
Gatti, M.;
Gruen, D.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Holder, G. P.;
Hoyle, B.;
Jarvis, M.;
Krause, E.;
MacCrann, N.;
Mawdsley, B.;
Nicola, A.;
Omori, Y.;
Pujol, A.;
Rau, M. M.;
Reichardt, C. L.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sheldon, E.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Aylor, K.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bertin, E.;
Bleem, L. E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Carlstrom, J. E.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Chang, C. L.;
Cho, H-M.;
Chown, R.;
Crites, A. T.;
Cunha, C. E.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dobbs, M. A.;
Doel, P.;
Everett, W. B.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
George, E. M.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
de Haan, T.;
Halverson, N. W.;
Harrington, N. L.;
Holzapfel, W. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Hou, Z.;
Hrubes, J. D.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Knox, L.;
Kron, R.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lee, A. T.;
Leitch, E. M.;
Lima, M.;
Luong-Van, D.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Manzotti, A.;
Marrone, D. P.;
Marshall, J. L.;
McMahon, J. J.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Meyer, S. S.;
Miller, C. J.;
Mocanu, L. M.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Natoli, T.;
Padin, S.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Pryke, C.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Ruhl, J. E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sanchez, E.;
Sayre, J. T.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schaffer, K. K.;
Serrano, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
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.;
Vanderlinde, K.;
Vieira, J. D.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.;
Williamson, R.;
Zahn, O.
Submitted: 2018-10-04, last modified: 2019-07-25
Correlations between tracers of the matter density field and gravitational
lensing are sensitive to the evolution of the matter power spectrum and the
expansion rate across cosmic time. Appropriately defined ratios of such
correlation functions, on the other hand, depend only on the angular diameter
distances to the tracer objects and to the gravitational lensing source planes.
Because of their simple cosmological dependence, such ratios can exploit
available signal-to-noise down to small angular scales, even where directly
modeling the correlation functions is difficult. We present a measurement of
lensing ratios using galaxy position and lensing data from the Dark Energy
Survey, and CMB lensing data from the South Pole Telescope and Planck,
obtaining the highest precision lensing ratio measurements to date. Relative to
the concordance $\Lambda$CDM model, we find a best fit lensing ratio amplitude
of $A = 1.1 \pm 0.1$. We use the ratio measurements to generate cosmological
constraints, focusing on the curvature parameter. We demonstrate that
photometrically selected galaxies can be used to measure lensing ratios, and
argue that future lensing ratio measurements with data from a combination of
LSST and Stage-4 CMB experiments can be used to place interesting cosmological
constraints, even after considering the systematic uncertainties associated
with photometric redshift and galaxy shear estimation.
[6]
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.
[7]
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 ...
[8]
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.
[9]
oai:arXiv.org:1810.02441 [pdf] - 1945701
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Cross-correlation between DES Y1
galaxy weak lensing and SPT+Planck CMB weak lensing
Omori, Y.;
Baxter, E.;
Chang, C.;
Kirk, D.;
Alarcon, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bleem, L. E.;
Cawthon, R.;
Choi, A.;
Chown, R.;
Crawford, T. M.;
Davis, C.;
De Vicente, J.;
DeRose, J.;
Dodelson, S.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Fosalba, P.;
Friedrich, O.;
Gatti, M.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gruen, D.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Holder, G. P.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huterer, D.;
Jain, B.;
Jarvis, M.;
Krause, E.;
MacCrann, N.;
Miquel, R.;
Prat, J.;
Rau, M. M.;
Reichardt, C. L.;
Rozo, E.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Secco, L. F.;
Sheldon, E.;
Simard, G.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Aylor, K.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bertin, E.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Brooks, D.;
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.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
da Costa, L. N.;
de Haan, T.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Dobbs, M. A.;
Everett, W. B.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
George, E. M.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Halverson, N. W.;
Harrington, N. L.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
Holzapfel, W. L.;
Hou, Z.;
Hrubes, J. D.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lima, M.;
Lin, H.;
Lee, A. T.;
Leitch, E. M.;
Luong-Van, D.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Manzotti, A.;
Marrone, D. P.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
McMahon, J. J.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Meyer, S. S.;
Mocanu, L. M.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Natoli, T.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Padin, S.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Pryke, C.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Ruhl, J. E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schaffer, K. K.;
Schindler, R.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Shirokoff, E.;
Smith, M.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Staniszewski, Z.;
Stark, A. A.;
Story, K. T.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Vanderlinde, K.;
Vieira, J. D.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.;
Weller, J.;
Williamson, R.;
Wu, W. L. K.;
Zahn, O.
Submitted: 2018-10-04
We cross-correlate galaxy weak lensing measurements from the Dark Energy
Survey (DES) year-one (Y1) data with a cosmic microwave background (CMB) weak
lensing map derived from South Pole Telescope (SPT) and Planck data, with an
effective overlapping area of 1289 deg$^{2}$. With the combined measurements
from four source galaxy redshift bins, we reject the hypothesis of no lensing
with a significance of $10.8\sigma$. When employing angular scale cuts, this
significance is reduced to $6.8\sigma$, which remains the highest
signal-to-noise measurement of its kind to date. We fit the amplitude of the
correlation functions while fixing the cosmological parameters to a fiducial
$\Lambda$CDM model, finding $A = 0.99 \pm 0.17$. We additionally use the
correlation function measurements to constrain shear calibration bias,
obtaining constraints that are consistent with previous DES analyses. Finally,
when performing a cosmological analysis under the $\Lambda$CDM model, we obtain
the marginalized constraints of $\Omega_{\rm m}=0.261^{+0.070}_{-0.051}$ and
$S_{8}\equiv \sigma_{8}\sqrt{\Omega_{\rm m}/0.3} = 0.660^{+0.085}_{-0.100}$.
These measurements are used in a companion work that presents cosmological
constraints from the joint analysis of two-point functions among galaxies,
galaxy shears, and CMB lensing using DES, SPT and Planck data.
[10]
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.
[11]
oai:arXiv.org:1802.05257 [pdf] - 1811023
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Methodology and Projections for Joint
Analysis of Galaxy Clustering, Galaxy Lensing, and CMB Lensing Two-point
Functions
Baxter, E. J.;
Omori, Y.;
Chang, C.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Kirk, D.;
Krause, E.;
Blazek, J.;
Bleem, L.;
Choi, A.;
Crawford, T. M.;
Dodelson, S.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Friedrich, O.;
Gruen, D.;
Holder, G. P.;
Jain, B.;
Jarvis, M.;
MacCrann, N.;
Nicola, A.;
Pandey, S.;
Prat, J.;
Reichardt, C. L.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Secco, L. F.;
Sheldon, E.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benson, B. A.;
Bertin, E.;
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.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D.;
Hoyle, B.;
James, D. J.;
Kent, S.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Roodman, A.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sanchez, E.;
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.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wu, W. L. K.;
Weller, J.
Submitted: 2018-02-14, last modified: 2018-10-04
Optical imaging surveys measure both the galaxy density and the gravitational
lensing-induced shear fields across the sky. Recently, the Dark Energy Survey
(DES) collaboration used a joint fit to two-point correlations between these
observables to place tight constraints on cosmology (DES Collaboration et al.
2017). In this work, we develop the methodology to extend the DES year one
joint probes analysis to include cross-correlations of the optical survey
observables with gravitational lensing of the cosmic microwave background (CMB)
as measured by the South Pole Telescope (SPT) and Planck. Using simulated
analyses, we show how the resulting set of five two-point functions increases
the robustness of the cosmological constraints to systematic errors in galaxy
lensing shear calibration. Additionally, we show that contamination of the
SPT+Planck CMB lensing map by the thermal Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect is a
potentially large source of systematic error for two-point function analyses,
but show that it can be reduced to acceptable levels in our analysis by masking
clusters of galaxies and imposing angular scale cuts on the two-point
functions. The methodology developed here will be applied to the analysis of
data from the DES, the SPT, and Planck in a companion work.
[12]
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.
[13]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01533 [pdf] - 1746405
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Weak Lensing Shape Catalogues
Zuntz, J.;
Sheldon, E.;
Samuroff, S.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Jarvis, M.;
MacCrann, N.;
Gruen, D.;
Prat, J.;
Sánchez, C.;
Choi, A.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Dodelson, S.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Fang, Y.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huff, E. M.;
Jain, B.;
Kirk, D.;
Kacprzak, T.;
Krawiec, C.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Soergel, B.;
Varga, T. N.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bertin, E.;
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.;
Davis, C.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Neto, A. Fausti;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
March, M.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miller, C. J.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Neilsen, E.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Roe, N.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
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.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Zhang, Y.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2018-09-07
We present two galaxy shape catalogues from the Dark Energy Survey Year 1
data set, covering 1500 square degrees with a median redshift of $0.59$. The
catalogues cover two main fields: Stripe 82, and an area overlapping the South
Pole Telescope survey region. We describe our data analysis process and in
particular our shape measurement using two independent shear measurement
pipelines, METACALIBRATION and IM3SHAPE. The METACALIBRATION catalogue uses a
Gaussian model with an innovative internal calibration scheme, and was applied
to $riz$-bands, yielding 34.8M objects. The IM3SHAPE catalogue uses a
maximum-likelihood bulge/disc model calibrated using simulations, and was
applied to $r$-band data, yielding 21.9M objects. Both catalogues pass a suite
of null tests that demonstrate their fitness for use in weak lensing science.
We estimate the 1$\sigma$ uncertainties in multiplicative shear calibration to
be $0.013$ and $0.025$ for the METACALIBRATION and IM3SHAPE catalogues,
respectively.
[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:1710.06808 [pdf] - 1751714
The Splashback Feature around DES Galaxy Clusters: Galaxy Density and
Weak Lensing Profiles
Chang, C.;
Baxter, E.;
Jain, B.;
Sánchez, C.;
Adhikari, S.;
Varga, T. N.;
Fang, Y.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Kravtsov, A.;
Gruen, D.;
Huff, E. M.;
Jarvis, M.;
Kim, A. G.;
Prat, J.;
MacCrann, N.;
McClintock, T.;
Palmese, A.;
Rapetti, D.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sheldon, E.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Zhang, Y.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Bechtol, K.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Brooks, D.;
Buckley-Geer, E.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da, L. N.;
Davis, C.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jeltema, T.;
Krause, E.;
Kuehn, K.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Nord, B.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, R. C.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Weller, J.
Submitted: 2017-10-18, last modified: 2018-07-31
Splashback refers to the process of matter that is accreting onto a dark
matter halo reaching its first orbital apocenter and turning around in its
orbit. The cluster-centric radius at which this process occurs, r_sp, defines a
halo boundary that is connected to the dynamics of the cluster. A rapid decline
in the halo profile is expected near r_sp. We measure the galaxy number density
and weak lensing mass profiles around redMaPPer galaxy clusters in the first
year Dark Energy Survey (DES) data. For a cluster sample with mean M_200m mass
~2.5 x 10^14 M_sun, we find strong evidence of a splashback-like steepening of
the galaxy density profile and measure r_sp=1.13 +/- 0.07 Mpc/h, consistent
with earlier SDSS measurements of More et al. (2016) and Baxter et al. (2017).
Moreover, our weak lensing measurement demonstrates for the first time the
existence of a splashback-like steepening of the matter profile of galaxy
clusters. We measure r_sp=1.34 +/- 0.21 Mpc/h from the weak lensing data, in
good agreement with our galaxy density measurements. For different cluster and
galaxy samples, we find that consistent with LCDM simulations, r_sp scales with
R_200m and does not evolve with redshift over the redshift range of 0.3--0.6.
We also find that potential systematic effects associated with the redMaPPer
algorithm may impact the location of r_sp. We discuss progress needed to
understand the systematic uncertainties and fully exploit forthcoming data from
DES and future surveys, emphasizing the importance of more realistic mock
catalogs and independent cluster samples.
[17]
oai:arXiv.org:1804.10663 [pdf] - 1728965
Survey geometry and the internal consistency of recent cosmic shear
measurements
Troxel, M. A.;
Krause, E.;
Chang, C.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Friedrich, O.;
Gruen, D.;
MacCrann, N.;
Chen, A.;
Davis, C.;
DeRose, J.;
Dodelson, S.;
Gatti, M.;
Hoyle, B.;
Huterer, D.;
Jarvis, M.;
Lacasa, F.;
Peiris, H. V.;
Prat, J.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sheldon, E.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Wang, M.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Allam, S.;
Annis, J.;
Avila, S.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Crocce, M.;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
De Vicente, J.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gschwend, J.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Hollowood, D. L.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Kirk, D.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schindler, R.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, M.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Thomas, D.;
Walker, A. R.;
Wechsler, R. H.
Submitted: 2018-04-27, last modified: 2018-07-31
We explore the impact of an update to the typical approximation for the shape
noise term in the analytic covariance matrix for cosmic shear experiments that
assumes the absence of survey boundary and mask effects. We present an exact
expression for the number of galaxy pairs in this term based on the the survey
mask, which leads to more than a factor of three increase in the shape noise on
the largest measured scales for the Kilo-Degree Survey (KIDS-450) real-space
cosmic shear data. We compare the result of this analytic expression to several
alternative methods for measuring the shape noise from the data and find
excellent agreement. This update to the covariance resolves any internal model
tension evidenced by the previously large cosmological best-fit $\chi^2$ for
the KiDS-450 cosmic shear data. The best-fit $\chi^2$ is reduced from 161 to
121 for 118 degrees of freedom. We also apply a correction to how the
multiplicative shear calibration uncertainty is included in the covariance.
This change, along with a previously known update to the reported effective
angular values of the data vector, jointly shift the inferred amplitude of the
correlation function to higher values. We find that this improves agreement of
the KiDS-450 cosmic shear results with Dark Energy Survey Year 1 and Planck
results.
[18]
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.
[19]
oai:arXiv.org:1708.01532 [pdf] - 1681410
Dark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Redshift distributions of the weak
lensing source galaxies
Hoyle, B.;
Gruen, D.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Rau, M. M.;
De Vicente, J.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
DeRose, J.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Davis, C.;
Alarcon, A.;
MacCrann, N.;
Prat, J.;
Sánchez, C.;
Sheldon, E.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Asorey, J.;
Becker, M. R.;
Bonnett, C.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Carollo, D.;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Castander, F. J.;
Cawthon, R.;
Chang, C.;
Childress, M.;
Davis, T. M.;
Drlica-Wagner, A.;
Gatti, M.;
Glazebrook, K.;
Gschwend, J.;
Hinton, S. R.;
Hoormann, J. K.;
Kim, A. G.;
King, A.;
Kuehn, K.;
Lewis, G.;
Lidman, C.;
Lin, H.;
Macaulay, E.;
Maia, M. A. G.;
Martini, P.;
Mudd, D.;
Möller, A.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Ogando, R. L. C.;
Rollins, R. P.;
Roodman, A.;
Ross, A. J.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Samuroff, S.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Sharp, R.;
Sommer, N. E.;
Tucker, B. E.;
Uddin, S. A.;
Varga, T. N.;
Vielzeuf, P.;
Yuan, F.;
Zhang, 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.;
Busha, M. T.;
Capozzi, D.;
Carretero, J.;
Crocce, M.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Fernandez, E.;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
García-Bellido, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Goldstein, D. A.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Jarvis, M.;
Jeltema, T.;
Johnson, M. W. G.;
Johnson, M. D.;
Kirk, D.;
Krause, E.;
Kuhlmann, S.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Li, T. S.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Miquel, R.;
Nord, B.;
O'Neill, C. R.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Sako, M.;
Sanchez, E.;
Santiago, B.;
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.;
Wester, W.;
Wolf, R. C.;
Yanny, B.;
Zuntz, J.
Submitted: 2017-08-04, last modified: 2018-05-11
We describe the derivation and validation of redshift distribution estimates
and their uncertainties for the galaxies used as weak lensing sources in the
Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 1 cosmological analyses. The Bayesian Photometric
Redshift (BPZ) code is used to assign galaxies to four redshift bins between
z=0.2 and 1.3, and to produce initial estimates of the lensing-weighted
redshift distributions $n^i_{PZ}(z)$ for bin i. Accurate determination of
cosmological parameters depends critically on knowledge of $n^i$ but is
insensitive to bin assignments or redshift errors for individual galaxies. The
cosmological analyses allow for shifts $n^i(z)=n^i_{PZ}(z-\Delta z^i)$ to
correct the mean redshift of $n^i(z)$ for biases in $n^i_{\rm PZ}$. The $\Delta
z^i$ are constrained by comparison of independently estimated 30-band
photometric redshifts of galaxies in the COSMOS field to BPZ estimates made
from the DES griz fluxes, for a sample matched in fluxes, pre-seeing size, and
lensing weight to the DES weak-lensing sources. In companion papers, the
$\Delta z^i$ are further constrained by the angular clustering of the source
galaxies around red galaxies with secure photometric redshifts at 0.15<z<0.9.
This paper details the BPZ and COSMOS procedures, and demonstrates that the
cosmological inference is insensitive to details of the $n^i(z)$ beyond the
choice of $\Delta z^i$. The clustering and COSMOS validation methods produce
consistent estimates of $\Delta z^i$, with combined uncertainties of
$\sigma_{\Delta z^i}=$0.015, 0.013, 0.011, and 0.022 in the four bins. We
marginalize over these in all analyses to follow, which does not diminish the
constraining power significantly. Repeating the photo-z procedure using the
Directional Neighborhood Fitting (DNF) algorithm instead of BPZ, or using the
$n^i(z)$ directly estimated from COSMOS, yields no discernible difference in
cosmological inferences.
[20]
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.
[21]
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.
[22]
oai:arXiv.org:1609.08167 [pdf] - 1580283
Galaxy bias from galaxy-galaxy lensing in the DES Science Verification
Data
Prat, J.;
Sánchez, C.;
Miquel, R.;
Kwan, J.;
Blazek, J.;
Bonnett, C.;
Amara, A.;
Bridle, S. L.;
Clampitt, J.;
Crocce, M.;
Fosalba, P.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Giannantonio, T.;
Hartley, W. G.;
Jarvis, M.;
MacCrann, N.;
Percival, W. J.;
Ross, A. J.;
Sheldon, E.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Annis, J.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Carretero, J.;
Castander, F. J.;
da Costa, L. N.;
DePoy, D. L.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Doel, P.;
Eifler, T. F.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Neto, A. Fausti;
Flaugher, B.;
Frieman, J.;
Gerdes, D. W.;
Gruen, D.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Gutierrez, G.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Melchior, P.;
Menanteau, F.;
Nord, B.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Reil, K.;
Romer, A. K.;
Roodman, A.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Walker, A. R.
Submitted: 2016-09-26, last modified: 2017-09-26
We present a measurement of galaxy-galaxy lensing around a magnitude-limited
($i_{AB} < 22.5$) sample of galaxies from the Dark Energy Survey Science
Verification (DES-SV) data. We split these lenses into three
photometric-redshift bins from 0.2 to 0.8, and determine the product of the
galaxy bias $b$ and cross-correlation coefficient between the galaxy and dark
matter overdensity fields $r$ in each bin, using scales above 4 Mpc/$h$
comoving, where we find the linear bias model to be valid given our current
uncertainties. We compare our galaxy bias results from galaxy-galaxy lensing
with those obtained from galaxy clustering (Crocce et al. 2016) and CMB lensing
(Giannantonio et al. 2016) for the same sample of galaxies, and find our
measurements to be in good agreement with those in Crocce et al. (2016), while,
in the lowest redshift bin ($z\sim0.3$), they show some tension with the
findings in Giannantonio et al. (2016). We measure $b\cdot r$ to be $0.87\pm
0.11$, $1.12 \pm 0.16$ and $1.24\pm 0.23$, respectively for the three redshift
bins of width $\Delta z = 0.2$ in the range $0.2<z <0.8$, defined with the
photometric-redshift algorithm BPZ. Using a different code to split the lens
sample, TPZ, leads to changes in the measured biases at the 10-20\% level, but
it does not alter the main conclusion of this work: when comparing with Crocce
et al. (2016) we do not find strong evidence for a cross-correlation parameter
significantly below one in this galaxy sample, except possibly at the lowest
redshift bin ($z\sim 0.3$), where we find $r = 0.71 \pm 0.11$ when using TPZ,
and $0.83 \pm 0.12$ with BPZ.
[23]
oai:arXiv.org:1603.05790 [pdf] - 1530541
Galaxy-Galaxy Lensing in the DES Science Verification Data
Clampitt, J.;
Sánchez, C.;
Kwan, J.;
Krause, E.;
MacCrann, N.;
Park, Y.;
Troxel, M. A.;
Jain, B.;
Rozo, E.;
Rykoff, E. S.;
Wechsler, R. H.;
Blazek, J.;
Bonnett, C.;
Crocce, M.;
Fang, Y.;
Gaztanaga, E.;
Gruen, D.;
Jarvis, M.;
Miquel, R.;
Prat, J.;
Ross, A. J.;
Sheldon, E.;
Zuntz, J.;
Abbott, T. M. C.;
Abdalla, F. B.;
Armstrong, R.;
Becker, M. R.;
Benoit-Lévy, A.;
Bernstein, G. M.;
Bertin, E.;
Brooks, D.;
Burke, D. L.;
Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco;
Cunha, C. E.;
D'Andrea, C. B.;
da Costa, L. N.;
Desai, S.;
Diehl, H. T.;
Dietrich, J. P.;
Doel, P.;
Estrada, J.;
Evrard, A. E.;
Neto, A. Fausti;
Flaugher, B.;
Fosalba, P.;
Frieman, J.;
Gruendl, R. A.;
Honscheid, K.;
James, D. J.;
Kuehn, K.;
Kuropatkin, N.;
Lahav, O.;
Lima, M.;
March, M.;
Marshall, J. L.;
Martini, P.;
Melchior, P.;
Mohr, J. J.;
Nichol, R. C.;
Nord, B.;
Plazas, A. A.;
Romer, A. K.;
Sanchez, E.;
Scarpine, V.;
Schubnell, M.;
Sevilla-Noarbe, I.;
Smith, R. C.;
Soares-Santos, M.;
Sobreira, F.;
Suchyta, E.;
Swanson, M. E. C.;
Tarle, G.;
Thomas, D.;
Vikram, V.;
Walker, A. R.
Submitted: 2016-03-18, last modified: 2016-12-09
We present galaxy-galaxy lensing results from 139 square degrees of Dark
Energy Survey (DES) Science Verification (SV) data. Our lens sample consists of
red galaxies, known as redMaGiC, which are specifically selected to have a low
photometric redshift error and outlier rate. The lensing measurement has a
total signal-to-noise of 29 over scales $0.09 < R < 15$ Mpc/$h$, including all
lenses over a wide redshift range $0.2 < z < 0.8$. Dividing the lenses into
three redshift bins for this constant moving number density sample, we find no
evidence for evolution in the halo mass with redshift. We obtain consistent
results for the lensing measurement with two independent shear pipelines, ngmix
and im3shape. We perform a number of null tests on the shear and photometric
redshift catalogs and quantify resulting systematic uncertainties. Covariances
from jackknife subsamples of the data are validated with a suite of 50 mock
surveys. The results and systematics checks in this work provide a critical
input for future cosmological and galaxy evolution studies with the DES data
and redMaGiC galaxy samples. We fit a Halo Occupation Distribution (HOD) model,
and demonstrate that our data constrains the mean halo mass of the lens
galaxies, despite strong degeneracies between individual HOD parameters.