Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userThe Impact of Non-Gaussian Errors on Weak Lensing Surveys
144
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The weak lensing power spectrum carries cosmological information via its dependence on the growth of structure and on geometric factors. Since much of the cosmological information comes from scales affected by nonlinear clustering, measurements of the lensing power spectrum can be degraded by non-Gaussian covariances. Recently there have been conflicting studies about the level of this degradation. We use the halo model to estimate it and include new contributions related to the finite size of lensing surveys, following Rimes and Hamiltons study of 3D simulations. We find that non-Gaussian correlations between different multipoles can degrade the cumulative signal-to-noise for the power spectrum amplitude by up to a factor of 2 (or 5 for a worst-case model that exceeds current N-body simulation predictions). However, using an eight-parameter Fisher analysis we find that the marginalized errors on individual parameters are degraded by less than 10% (or 20% for the worst-case model). The smaller degradation in parameter accuracy is primarily because: individual parameters in a high-dimensional parameter space are degraded much less than the volume of the full Fisher ellipsoid; lensing involves projections along the line of sight, which reduce the non-Gaussian effect; some of the cosmological information comes from geometric factors which are not degraded at all. We contrast our findings with those of Lee & Pen (2008) who suggested a much larger degradation in information content. Finally, our results give a useful guide for exploring survey design by giving the cosmological information returns for varying survey area, depth and the level of some systematic errors.
rate research
Read More
The results from weak gravitational lensing analyses are subject to a cosmic variance error term that has previously been estimated assuming Gaussian statistics. In this letter we address the issue of estimating cosmic variance errors for weak lensing surveys in the non-Gaussian regime. Using standard cold dark matter model ray-tracing simulations characterized by Omega_m=0.3, Omega_Lambda=0.7, h=0.7, sigma_8=1.0 for different survey redshifts z_s, we determine the variance of the two-point shear correlation function measured across 64 independent lines of sight. We compare the measured variance to the variance expected from a random Gaussian field and derive a redshift-dependent non-Gaussian calibration relation. We find that the ratio can be as high as ~30 for a survey with source redshift z_s ~ 0.5 and ~10 for z_s ~ 1. The transition scale theta_c above which the ratio is consistent with unity, is found to be theta_c ~ 20 arcmin for z_s ~ 0.5 and theta_c ~ 10 arcmin for z_s ~ 1. We provide fitting formula to our results permitting the estimation of non-Gaussian cosmic variance errors for any weak lensing analysis, and discuss the impact on current and future surveys. A more extensive set of simulations will however be required to investigate the dependence of our results on cosmology, specifically on the amplitude of clustering.
The B modes generated by the lensing of CMB polarization are a primary target for the upcoming generation of experiments and can potentially constrain quantities such as the neutrino mass and dark energy equation of state. The net sample variance on the small scale B modes out to l=2000 exceeds Gaussian expectations by a factor of 10 reflecting the variance of the larger scale lenses that generate them. It manifests itself as highly correlated band powers with correlation coefficients approaching 70% for wide bands of Delta l/l ~0.25. It will double the total variance for experiments that achieve a sensitivity of approximately 4 uK-arcmin and a beam of several arcminutes or better. This non-Gaussianity must be taken into account in the analysis of experiments that go beyond first detection.
Obtaining accurate distributions of galaxy redshifts is a critical aspect of weak lensing cosmology experiments. One of the methods used to estimate and validate redshift distributions is apply weights to a spectroscopic sample so that their weighted photometry distribution matches the target sample. In this work we estimate the textit{selection bias} in redshift that is introduced in this procedure. We do so by simulating the process of assembling a spectroscopic sample (including observer-assigned confidence flags) and highlight the impacts of spectroscopic target selection and redshift failures. We use the first year (Y1) weak lensing analysis in DES as an example data set but the implications generalise to all similar weak lensing surveys. We find that using colour cuts that are not available to the weak lensing galaxies can introduce biases of $Delta~zsim0.015$ in the weighted mean redshift of different redshift intervals. To assess the impact of incompleteness in spectroscopic samples, we select only objects with high observer-defined confidence flags and compare the weighted mean redshift with the true mean. We find that the mean redshift of the DES Y1 weak lensing sample is typically biased at the $Delta~z=0.005-0.05$ level after the weighting is applied. The bias we uncover can have either sign, depending on the samples and redshift interval considered. For the highest redshift bin, the bias is larger than the uncertainties in the other DES Y1 redshift calibration methods, justifying the decision of not using this method for the redshift estimations. We discuss several methods to mitigate this bias.
Weak lensing is emerging as a powerful observational tool to constrain cosmological models, but is at present limited by an incomplete understanding of many sources of systematic error. Many of these errors are multiplicative and depend on the population of background galaxies. We show how the commonly cited geometric test, which is rather insensitive to cosmology, can be used as a ratio test of systematics in the lensing signal at the 1 per cent level. We apply this test to the galaxy-galaxy lensing analysis of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), which at present is the sample with the highest weak lensing signal to noise and has the additional advantage of spectroscopic redshifts for lenses. This allows one to perform meaningful geometric tests of systematics for different subsamples of galaxies at different mean redshifts, such as brighter galaxies, fainter galaxies and high-redshift luminous red galaxies, both with and without photometric redshift estimates. We use overlapping objects between SDSS and the DEEP2 and 2SLAQ spectroscopic surveys to establish accurate calibration of photometric redshifts and to determine the redshift distributions for SDSS. We use these redshift results to compute the projected surface density contrast DeltaSigma around 259 609 spectroscopic galaxies in the SDSS; by measuring DeltaSigma with different source samples we establish consistency of the results at the 10 per cent level (1-sigma). We also use the ratio test to constrain shear calibration biases and other systematics in the SDSS survey data to determine the overall galaxy-galaxy weak lensing signal calibration uncertainty. We find no evidence of any inconsistency among many subsamples of the data.
A fraction of the light observed from edge-on disk galaxies is polarized due to two physical effects: selective extinction by dust grains aligned with the magnetic field, and scattering of the anisotropic starlight field. Since the reflection and transmission coefficients of the reflecting and refracting surfaces in an optical system depend on the polarization of incoming rays, this optical polarization produces both (a) a selection bias in favor of galaxies with specific orientations and (b) a polarization-dependent PSF. In this work we build toy models to obtain for the first time an estimate for the impact of polarization on PSF shapes and the impact of the selection bias due to the polarization effect on the measurement of the ellipticity used in shear measurements. In particular, we are interested in determining if this effect will be significant for WFIRST. We show that the systematic uncertainties in the ellipticity components are $8times 10^{-5}$ and $1.1 times 10^{-4}$ due to the selection bias and PSF errors respectively. Compared to the overall requirements on knowledge of the WFIRST PSF ellipticity ($4.7times 10^{-4}$ per component), both of these systematic uncertainties are sufficiently close to the WFIRST tolerance level that more detailed studies of the polarization effects or more stringent requirements on polarization-sensitive instrumentation for WFIRST are required.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
