Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userDark Energy Survey Year 1 Results: Calibration of redMaGiC Redshift Distributions in DES and SDSS from Cross-Correlations
120
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We present calibrations of the redshift distributions of redMaGiC galaxies in the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) and Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) DR8 data. These results determine the priors of the redshift distribution of redMaGiC galaxies, which were used for galaxy clustering measurements and as lenses for galaxy-galaxy lensing measurements in DES Y1 cosmological analyses. We empirically determine the bias in redMaGiC photometric redshift estimates using angular cross-correlations with Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS) galaxies. For DES, we calibrate a single parameter redshift bias in three photometric redshift bins: $z in[0.15,0.3]$, [0.3,0.45], and [0.45,0.6]. Our best fit results in each bin give photometric redshift biases of $|Delta z|<0.01$. To further test the redMaGiC algorithm, we apply our calibration procedure to SDSS redMaGiC galaxies, where the statistical precision of the cross-correlation measurement is much higher due to a greater overlap with BOSS galaxies. For SDSS, we also find best fit results of $|Delta z|<0.01$. We compare our results to other analyses of redMaGiC photometric redshifts.
rate research
Read More
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-Zeldovich 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.
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.
We present clustering redshift measurements for Dark Energy Survey (DES) lens sample galaxies to be used in weak gravitational lensing and galaxy clustering studies. To perform this measurement, we cross-correlate with spectroscopic galaxies from the Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Survey (BOSS) and its extension, eBOSS. We validate our methodology in simulations, including a new technique to calibrate systematic errors due to the galaxy clustering bias, finding our method to be generally unbiased in calibrating the mean redshift. We apply our method to the data, and estimate the redshift distribution for eleven different photometrically-selected bins. We find general agreement between clustering redshift and photometric redshift estimates, with differences on the inferred mean redshift to be below $|Delta z|=0.01$ in most of the bins. We also test a method to calibrate a width parameter for redshift distributions, which we found necessary to use for some of our samples. Our typical uncertainties on the mean redshift ranged from 0.003 to 0.008, while our uncertainties on the width ranged from 4 to 9%. We discuss how these results calibrate the photometric redshift distributions used in companion DES Year 3 Results papers.
We use numerical simulations to characterize the performance of a clustering-based method to calibrate photometric redshift biases. In particular, we cross-correlate the weak lensing (WL) source galaxies from the Dark Energy Survey Year 1 (DES Y1) sample with redMaGiC galaxies (luminous red galaxies with secure photometric redshifts) to estimate the redshift distribution of the former sample. The recovered redshift distributions are used to calibrate the photometric redshift bias of standard photo-$z$ methods applied to the same source galaxy sample. We apply the method to three photo-$z$ codes run in our simulated data: Bayesian Photometric Redshift (BPZ), Directional Neighborhood Fitting (DNF), and Random Forest-based photo-$z$ (RF). We characterize the systematic uncertainties of our calibration procedure, and find that these systematic uncertainties dominate our error budget. The dominant systematics are due to our assumption of unevolving bias and clustering across each redshift bin, and to differences between the shapes of the redshift distributions derived by clustering vs photo-$z$s. The systematic uncertainty in the mean redshift bias of the source galaxy sample is $Delta z lesssim 0.02$, though the precise value depends on the redshift bin under consideration. We discuss possible ways to mitigate the impact of our dominant systematics in future analyses.
We combine Dark Energy Survey Year 1 clustering and weak lensing data with Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) experiments to constrain the Hubble constant. Assuming a flat $Lambda$CDM model with minimal neutrino mass ($sum m_ u = 0.06$ eV) we find $H_0=67.2^{+1.2}_{-1.0}$ km/s/Mpc (68% CL). This result is completely independent of Hubble constant measurements based on the distance ladder, Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) anisotropies (both temperature and polarization), and strong lensing constraints. There are now five data sets that: a) have no shared observational systematics; and b) each constrain the Hubble constant with a few percent level precision. We compare these five independent measurements, and find that, as a set, the differences between them are significant at the $2.1sigma$ level ($chi^2/dof=20.1/11$, probability to exceed=4%). This difference is low enough that we consider the data sets statistically consistent with each other. The best fit Hubble constant obtained by combining all five data sets is $H_0 = 69.1^{+0.4}_{-0.6}$ km/s/Mpc.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
