Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions
<p>Upcoming imaging surveys will allow for high signal-to-noise measurements of galaxy clustering at small scales. In this work, we present the results of the Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) bias challenge, the goal of which is to compare the performance of different n...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2024
|
| _version_ | 1797112716371951616 |
|---|---|
| author | Nicola, A Hadzhiyska, B Findlay, N García-García, C Alonso, D Slosar, A Guo, Z Kokron, N Angulo, R Aviles, A Blazek, J Dunkley, J Jain, B Pellejero, M Sullivan, J Walter, CW Zennaro, M |
| author2 | LSST Dark Energy Science collaboration |
| author_facet | LSST Dark Energy Science collaboration Nicola, A Hadzhiyska, B Findlay, N García-García, C Alonso, D Slosar, A Guo, Z Kokron, N Angulo, R Aviles, A Blazek, J Dunkley, J Jain, B Pellejero, M Sullivan, J Walter, CW Zennaro, M |
| author_sort | Nicola, A |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p>Upcoming imaging surveys will allow for high signal-to-noise measurements of galaxy clustering at small scales. In this work, we present the results of the Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) bias challenge, the goal of which is to compare the performance of different nonlinear galaxy bias models in the context of LSST Year 10 (Y10) data. Specifically, we compare two perturbative approaches, Lagrangian perturbation theory (LPT) and Eulerian perturbation theory (EPT) to two variants of Hybrid Effective Field Theory (HEFT), with our fiducial implementation of these models including terms up to second order in the bias expansion as well as nonlocal bias and deviations from Poissonian stochasticity. We consider a variety of different simulated galaxy samples and test the performance of the bias models in a tomographic joint analysis of LSST-Y10-like galaxy clustering, galaxy-galaxy-lensing and cosmic shear. We find both HEFT methods as well as LPT and EPT combined with non-perturbative predictions for the matter power spectrum to yield unbiased constraints on cosmological parameters up to at least a maximal scale of <em>k</em><sub>max</sub> = 0.4 Mpc<sup>-1</sup> for all samples considered, even in the presence of assembly bias. While we find that we can reduce the complexity of the bias model for HEFT without compromising fit accuracy, this is not generally the case for the perturbative models. We find significant detections of non-Poissonian stochasticity in all cases considered, and our analysis shows evidence that small-scale galaxy clustering predominantly improves constraints on galaxy bias rather than cosmological parameters. These results therefore suggest that the systematic uncertainties associated with current nonlinear bias models are likely to be subdominant compared to other sources of error for tomographic analyses of upcoming photometric surveys, which bodes well for future galaxy clustering analyses using these high signal-to-noise data.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T08:29:20Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:8bd9aed1-364a-4d64-ae86-4a798581f5ae |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T08:29:20Z |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| publisher | IOP Publishing |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:8bd9aed1-364a-4d64-ae86-4a798581f5ae2024-03-04T10:23:54ZGalaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansionsJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:8bd9aed1-364a-4d64-ae86-4a798581f5aeEnglishSymplectic ElementsIOP Publishing2024Nicola, AHadzhiyska, BFindlay, NGarcía-García, CAlonso, DSlosar, AGuo, ZKokron, NAngulo, RAviles, ABlazek, JDunkley, JJain, BPellejero, MSullivan, JWalter, CWZennaro, MLSST Dark Energy Science collaboration<p>Upcoming imaging surveys will allow for high signal-to-noise measurements of galaxy clustering at small scales. In this work, we present the results of the Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST) bias challenge, the goal of which is to compare the performance of different nonlinear galaxy bias models in the context of LSST Year 10 (Y10) data. Specifically, we compare two perturbative approaches, Lagrangian perturbation theory (LPT) and Eulerian perturbation theory (EPT) to two variants of Hybrid Effective Field Theory (HEFT), with our fiducial implementation of these models including terms up to second order in the bias expansion as well as nonlocal bias and deviations from Poissonian stochasticity. We consider a variety of different simulated galaxy samples and test the performance of the bias models in a tomographic joint analysis of LSST-Y10-like galaxy clustering, galaxy-galaxy-lensing and cosmic shear. We find both HEFT methods as well as LPT and EPT combined with non-perturbative predictions for the matter power spectrum to yield unbiased constraints on cosmological parameters up to at least a maximal scale of <em>k</em><sub>max</sub> = 0.4 Mpc<sup>-1</sup> for all samples considered, even in the presence of assembly bias. While we find that we can reduce the complexity of the bias model for HEFT without compromising fit accuracy, this is not generally the case for the perturbative models. We find significant detections of non-Poissonian stochasticity in all cases considered, and our analysis shows evidence that small-scale galaxy clustering predominantly improves constraints on galaxy bias rather than cosmological parameters. These results therefore suggest that the systematic uncertainties associated with current nonlinear bias models are likely to be subdominant compared to other sources of error for tomographic analyses of upcoming photometric surveys, which bodes well for future galaxy clustering analyses using these high signal-to-noise data.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Nicola, A Hadzhiyska, B Findlay, N García-García, C Alonso, D Slosar, A Guo, Z Kokron, N Angulo, R Aviles, A Blazek, J Dunkley, J Jain, B Pellejero, M Sullivan, J Walter, CW Zennaro, M Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions |
| title | Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions |
| title_full | Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions |
| title_fullStr | Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions |
| title_full_unstemmed | Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions |
| title_short | Galaxy bias in the era of LSST: perturbative bias expansions |
| title_sort | galaxy bias in the era of lsst perturbative bias expansions |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nicolaa galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT hadzhiyskab galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT findlayn galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT garciagarciac galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT alonsod galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT slosara galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT guoz galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT kokronn galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT angulor galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT avilesa galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT blazekj galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT dunkleyj galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT jainb galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT pellejerom galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT sullivanj galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT waltercw galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions AT zennarom galaxybiasintheeraoflsstperturbativebiasexpansions |