Tetrad formalism for exact cosmological observables

Ermis Mitsou; Jaiyul Yoo

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 123 references

Tetrad formalism for exact cosmological observables

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Cosmological observables need the observer's own frame in the sky map

desk verdict A substantial, honest derivation paper: the observer-space-time construction is genuinely new and mostly works, with an admitted gauge limitation and a kinetic-theory section that needs careful refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.10757 v2 pith:VO5UH4CZ submitted 2019-08-28 astro-ph.CO

Ermis Mitsou , Jaiyul Yoo This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.CO

keywords tetradformalismcosmologicalobservablesobserverspace-timeskyangulardiameterdistanceweaklensinggalaxynumbercountsmatrixkinetictheory

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that a piece of the standard pipeline for cosmological observables is missing: the angular parametrization of the sky must be the one fixed by the observer's own orthonormal frame, and at nonlinear order the mismatch with coordinate-induced angles produces corrections at all multipoles. To make this precise, the authors develop a tetrad-based formalism in which source and observer frames are unified into a single tetrad field, and all observables live on an 'observer space-time' with coordinates (proper time, redshift, angles) rather than on space-time itself. This gives exact, coordinate-independent and model-independent definitions and evolution equations for angular diameter distance, weak lensing, number counts and CMB observables, and it resolves light-ray caustics because the map from observer space to the light-cone need not be injective. A sympathetic reader would care because the formalism removes an approximation that the authors argue is no longer justified at the precision of current and future surveys.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the tetrad field $e^a_\mu(x)$: an orthonormal basis at every space-time point, with $a=0$ the 4-velocity and $a=i$ the spatial rest-frame axes. On top of it sit the 'observer sky' $S$ parametrized by the observed angles $(\vartheta,\varphi)$ and the 'observer space-time' $\mathcal{O}=\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}_+\times S$, whose coordinates are observer proper time $\tau$, log-redshift $\zeta=\log(1+z)$, and sky angles. A bundle of past-directed null geodesics maps $\mathcal{O}$ into the true space-time, and because this map need not be injective, caustics are resolved. On $\mathcal{O}$ the central working objects are the Jacobi map $J_{AB}$ and its companion $K_{AB}$, decomposed into angular diameter distance $D$, rotation $s_\circ$, shear $s$, optical expansion $\theta$ and shear rate $\sigma$; their evolution equations are the Sachs equations rewritten in the observed redshift parameter. A full-sky Sachs basis is fixed by matching the dyad of the observer sky, so tensors on the sky get a global angular parametrization. For the CMB, the machinery shifts to on-shell Lorentz phase space with matrix distributions $f_{ss'}(x,\vec p)$, whose collision term is built directly from Lorentz-indexed QFT amplitudes.

What would settle it

Compute $\Sigma^0_{\parallel}$ along a family of null geodesics in a space-time with a strong-lensing configuration or a deep local potential well; wherever it crosses zero, Eqs. (4.23)–(4.24) become singular, showing that the redshift parametrization is not universal and the formalism must switch to another parametrization.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the standard description of cosmological observables is incomplete: it uses angles read off coordinate-induced spatial vectors, which are neither orthonormal nor normal to the observer 4-velocity, instead of the angles the observer actually uses. The proposed cure is to promote the observer frame to a full tetrad field, so that source frames and observer frames are unified, and to define all observables on an 'observer space-time' manifold parametrized by proper time, redshift and sky angles. On this manifold the paper derives fully nonlinear, coordinate-independent equations for the angular diameter distance, weak lensing (including image rotation and shear), volume elements and galaxy number counts, and it rebuilds matrix kinetic theory so that CMB observables are pulled back from the photon phase-space distribution. Because the map from observer space to the true light-cone is allowed to be non-injective, caustics are not singularities of the observable maps.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the gauge (4.20) makes sense: the quantity $\Sigma^0_{\parallel}$, the log-redshift derivative along each null geodesic, never vanishes, which the paper assumes holds for 'cosmology with mild inhomogeneity and anisotropy'; if it vanishes, the evolution equations in $\zeta$ become singular and another parametrization must be used.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Angular diameter distance, image rotation and shear can be evolved directly in the observed redshift variable $\zeta$, with the Jacobi map determined by fully nonlinear equations that make no reference to a background metric.
Because observer space is a 3-cylinder and its map to the light-cone need only be non-injective, caustics of the light bundle do not make the observable maps singular, unlike observational-coordinate approaches.
The full observer frame introduces observer-position terms that, at nonlinear order, couple to source and line-of-sight terms and therefore affect all multipoles of angular spectra, not just the lowest ones.
The volume and number-count relation $V=D^2/(e^\zeta \Sigma^0_{nn})$ gives an exact, coordinate-independent conversion between observed solid angle and redshift intervals and source rest-frame volume.
CMB observables are defined by evaluating the photon matrix distribution on the spectral observer sky, with a collision term that is independent of the gravitational field because QFT amplitudes are written in Lorentz indices.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A practical test of the observer-frame corrections would be to compare angular spectra computed with coordinate-induced angles against observer-frame angles in the same simulated space-time; the difference isolates exactly the observer terms at all multipoles.
The same observer-space construction could be applied to relativistic astrometry of nearby sources or lensing by compact objects, where $\Sigma^0_{\parallel}$ can vanish and the required switch of parametrization can be studied concretely.
The Lorentz-indexed collision term suggests that relativistic Boltzmann solvers could precompute QFT amplitudes once in Minkowski space and avoid recomputing metric-dependent collision integrals, a structure worth testing in numerical kinetic codes.
Extending the observer-space-time to non-geodesic observers would give exact drift formulae for all observables; since the paper notes the transformation between observer world-lines is complicated, a numerical implementation may be the most direct route.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know two things about arXiv:1908.10757. First, it is a real methodological step forward: the observer space-time O with coordinates (proper time, redshift, angles) gives a coordinate-free, fully nonlinear home for exact cosmological observables, and the caustic resolution via a non-injective map from observer space to M is a genuine structural improvement over observational-coordinate approaches. Second, the paper is honest about its main limitation: the redshift gauge (4.20) requires Sigma^0_|| != 0, and the authors explicitly restrict to mild inhomogeneity and anisotropy. That is not a hidden flaw.

What is actually new: the observer space-time manifold, the redshift parametrization of the geodesic-deviation equations, the full-sky Sachs basis with compensating local Lorentz transformations, and the matrix kinetic theory with cluster decomposition and an alternative collision term. The core derivations in Sections 3 and 4 are internally consistent; they reduce to known results in the right limits, including the observational-coordinates metric (4.192) and the vanishing of the rotation angle at first order. The definitions are constructed, not fitted, and there are no free parameters. For a derivation paper, that is the right standard.

The stress-test concern about frequency extrema is real but not fatal. The paper itself flags the singular case in Section 4.2 and Section 4.4.2 and notes that one should switch parametrization. So the exactness is conditional on a mild-inhomogeneity assumption, not generic strong-field universality. But the caustic-resolution claim is about the non-injectivity of the map, not about redshift monotonicity, and that part holds.

The softest spot is Section 5. The collision term rests on the hand-imposed matching condition (5.85), and the alternative collision term deviates from the literature at higher order. I could not fully verify the cluster-decomposition manipulations from the text, and a referee should be asked to check them line by line. The neutrino mass discussion is careful, but it also shows the formalism does not handle superpositions of different mass shells in general.

No numerical checks are included; none are required for this kind of paper. The citation pattern is fine, and reliance on companion work is explicit.

Bottom line: this deserves serious peer review, not desk rejection. Send it to a referee who knows both exact cosmological observables and kinetic theory, and ask them to focus on Section 4.2 and Sections 5.5-5.6. I would cite it, and I'd bring selected parts of it to a reading group, though the full paper is too long for one sitting.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a tetrad-based formalism for defining and computing cosmological observables at the fully nonlinear, coordinate-independent level. The central object is the 'observer space-time' O, parametrized by observer proper time, log-redshift, and the observer-frame angles, with observables defined as fields on this space rather than on the physical spacetime M. The authors derive exact equations for the angular diameter distance, weak lensing, and galaxy number counts, and revisit general-relativistic matrix kinetic theory for CMB observables, including a matrix Boltzmann equation and a collision term built from QFT amplitudes.

Significance. If the claimed generality holds, this is a substantial unifying framework: it eliminates the observer-frame ambiguity in angular parametrization, gives exact evolution equations in directly observed variables, and offers a principled way to handle caustics by avoiding coordinate singularities on M. The derivation of the Jacobi-map system in Sec. 4.7.1, the consistency check with observational coordinates in Eqs. (4.192)-(4.195), and the explicit discussion of observer-frame terms at low multipoles are valuable and carefully presented. The paper is also commendable for stating several of its own limitations explicitly, notably the redshift-gauge restriction in Sec. 4.2 and the by-hand matching condition for the collision term in Sec. 5.5. These limitations, however, are in tension with the unrestricted 'fully non-linear and exact' claims in the abstract and introduction, and this tension needs to be resolved before the paper can be recommended for publication.

major comments (2)

[Sec. 4.2, Eq. (4.20)] The gauge fixing ǫ = 1/(ω Σ^0_||) makes the log-redshift ζ the line parameter, but it becomes singular whenever Σ^0_|| = 0 along a past-directed null geodesic. The paper acknowledges this in Sec. 4.2 and Sec. 4.4.2, but the abstract and introduction nonetheless state that the formalism is exact, fully nonlinear, and resolves caustics without this restriction. Since the evolution equations (4.23), (4.24), and (4.154)-(4.158) are written in terms of ζ, they become singular at frequency extrema even when the physical observables are regular. Thus the advertised caustic resolution is conditional on monotonicity of the redshift parameter, i.e. on the mild-inhomogeneity restriction, and does not hold for generic strong-field spacetimes. I recommend either qualifying the headline claims to state the mild-inhomogeneity restriction explicitly, or extending the construction to a parametrization that remains regular through Σ^0_|| = 0.
[Sec. 5.5, Eq. (5.85)] The collision term is fixed by the matching condition C_ss'(p) = (E_p,s/T)[f_out_{ss'}(p) - f_in_{ss'}(p)], and the text explicitly states that this condition is imposed by hand and is not derivable from more fundamental equations in the present framework. This is an important limitation on the word 'ab initio' used in the introduction for the kinetic-theory part of the paper. The geometric and gravitational side is derived, but the Boltzmann collision integral is an input assumption. The manuscript should state this limitation more prominently and avoid implying that the kinetic-theory equations are derived solely from GR and QFT.

minor comments (3)

[Sec. 4.7.1, after Eq. (4.159)] The sentence 'using (4.155) and (4.155)' contains a duplicated equation reference; it should presumably read '(4.155) and (4.156)'.
[Sec. 4.8] The notation using a hat for both observer-frame quantities and for the observational-coordinate labels in Eq. (4.192) makes some formulas hard to parse; a brief summary of the hatted-index conventions would improve readability.
[Sec. 1, paragraph 1] The phrase 'The standard description of cosmological observables is incomplete' is a strong claim that could be misread as a blanket statement; although footnote 2 clarifies the intended meaning, the first paragraph would benefit from stating that the incompleteness concerns the observer-frame angular parametrization rather than the physical content of the standard calculations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation is self-contained, and the admitted redshift-gauge restriction is a limitation rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs by construction. The observer-space coordinates {τ,z,ϑ,ϕ} are introduced as the measured parametrization, but the observables of interest — angular diameter distance, weak lensing shear, number counts, and CMB maps — are computed from the geodesic equation, parallel transport, the Jacobi map, and the volume relation, rather than being fitted or assumed. For example, D(ζ,ϑ)=√det J follows from the area relation in Eq. (4.120), and the evolution system (4.154)-(4.158) is derived from the projected geodesic deviation equations (4.131) and (4.134), which in turn follow from the definitions of the Sachs basis and curvature. No free parameter is tuned to reproduce any observable, and the 'predictions' are not merely renamed inputs. The redshift gauge ǫ=1/(ωΣ^0_||) in Eq. (4.20) is an explicit parameterization choice, and the paper itself acknowledges in §4.4.2 that it becomes singular when Σ^0_||=0, restricting the claimed caustic resolution to mild-inhomogeneity cosmology. That is a stated limitation on scope, not a circular dependency. The only self-reference is companion citation [61] for the statistical impact of observer-frame terms; that citation supports the practical relevance of the claimed effect but does not carry the formal derivation, which stands on the paper's own geometric and QFT arguments. Therefore, no circular step meets the evidence bar set by the analysis rules.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The formalism rests on standard GR and QFT assumptions, plus a few domain restrictions: mild inhomogeneity for the redshift gauge, dilute-gas molecular chaos, and mass-degenerate superposable sectors. No free parameters are fitted to data. The observer space-time and mesoscopic space-time are mathematical constructs, not physical entities.

assumptions (6)

standard math Torsion-free, metric-compatible spin connection in GR
Used throughout section 3.2; the tetrad formalism is set up with the Levi-Civita connection and zero torsion, as in standard GR.
domain assumption Photon propagation follows null geodesics (eikonal approximation)
Basic for all observables; section 4.1 uses the point-particle action with m=q=0 and identifies the photon momentum with a null vector.
domain assumption The redshift parametrization gauge ǫ = 1/(ω Σ^0_||) is well-defined, i.e., Σ^0_|| never vanishes
Section 4.2, Eqs. (4.20)-(4.22); restricts to mild inhomogeneity and anisotropy in cosmology; if violated, the ζ-parametrization breaks down.
domain assumption Dilute gas and molecular chaos for the Boltzmann equation
Sections 5.1 and 5.3; requires L_free >> L_coll and factorization of higher-order correlations in the 'in' state.
domain assumption The matching condition (5.85) between macroscopic and microscopic time derivatives
Imposed by hand in section 5.5; identifies the collision term with a finite T-derivative of the S-matrix expectation value.
domain assumption Mass degeneracy in superposable blocks: m_s ≠ m_s' implies f_ss' = 0
Derived in section 5.2 as necessary for LLT invariance of the Liouville operator; restricts matrix distributions to equal-mass sectors, with neutrinos treated via the trace.

invented entities (2)

Observer space-time O (and observer space C)
purpose: Manifold on which cosmological observables are defined; coordinates (τ, z, ϑ, ϕ) and (z, ϑ, ϕ); resolves caustics because the map to spacetime can be non-injective.
A mathematical construction, not a physical entity; its utility is internal to the formalism, and no independent falsifiable prediction is attached to it.
Microscopic/mesoscopic Minkowski space-time X^a
purpose: Fourier-dual space to the tetrad-frame momentum p_a; hosts the QFT scattering processes in the collision term.
A mathematical device to separate macro and micro scales; not a physical dimension in spacetime.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tetrad formalism for exact cosmological observables." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VO5UH4CZ

@misc{pith2026190810757,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tetrad formalism for exact cosmological observables},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VO5UH4CZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.10757}
}

read the original abstract

The standard description of cosmological observables is incomplete, because it does not take into account the correct angular parametrization of the sky, i.e. the one determined by the observer frame. The corresponding corrections must be taken into account for reliable results at non-linear orders. This can be accomplished by introducing an orthonormal basis, or "tetrad", at the observer point, representing the frame with respect to which observations are performed. In this work we consider the tetrad formulation of General Relativity, thus associating tetrads to sources as well, and develop a new formalism for describing cosmological observables associated with localized sources. It is based on a manifold which we call the "observer space-time", whose coordinates are the proper time, redshift and angles an observer uses to parametrize measurements, and on which the rest of the observables are defined. This manifold does not have to be diffeomorphic to the true space-time and allows us to resolve caustics in the latter, in contrast to similar coordinate-based formalisms. As a concrete example, we work out the definitions and equations for the angular diameter distance, weak lensing and number count observables. As for the observables associated to the CMB, they lie inside the phase space distribution of the photon fluid, so we also revisit the construction of general-relativistic matrix kinetic theory from the tetrad formalism viewpoint. Here too the latter appears as the natural approach for relating the macroscopic dynamics to the microscopic quantum field theory, and therefore for constructing the matrix Boltzmann equations, without any approximation on the gravitational side. (... more in the manuscript)

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

123 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

[1]

Komatsu, K

E. Komatsu, K. M. Smith, J. Dunkley, C. L. Bennett, B. Gold, G. H inshaw et al., Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations : Cosmological Interpretation , The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 192 (2011) 18 [ 1001.4538]

arXiv 2011
[2]

Planck Collaboration et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters , arXiv e-prints (2018) [ 1807.06209]

arXiv 2018
[3]

Planck Collaboration et al., Planck 2018 results. I. Overview and the cosmological legac y of Planck, arXiv e-prints (2018) [ 1807.06205]

arXiv 2018
[4]

SDSS collaboration, Cosmological Constraints from the SDSS Luminous Red Galaxi es, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 123507 [astro-ph/0608632]

arXiv 2006
[5]

M. Levi, C. Bebek, T. Beers, R. Blum, R. Cahn, D. Eisenstein et al., The DESI Experiment, a whitepaper for Snowmass 2013 , ArXiv e-prints (2013) [ 1308.0847]

arXiv 2013
[6]

C. W. Stubbs, D. Sweeney, J. A. Tyson and LSST Collaboration, An Overview of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) System , in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, vol. 36 of Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society , p. 108.02, Dec., 2004. – 103 –

2004
[7]

Green, P

J. Green, P. Schechter, C. Baltay, R. Bean, D. Bennett, R. Br own et al., Wide-Field InfraRed Survey Telescope (WFIRST) Final Report , 1208.4012

arXiv
[8]

P. E. Dewdney, P. J. Hall, R. T. Schilizzi and T. J. L. W. Lazio, The Square Kilometre Array , IEEE Proceedings 97 (2009) 1482

2009

Show all 123 references

[9]

Laureijs, J

R. Laureijs, J. Amiaux, S. Arduini, J. Augu` eres, J. Brinchmann , R. Cole et al., Euclid Deﬁnition Study Report , ArXiv e-prints (2011) [ 1110.3193]

2011 arXiv
[10]

Challinor and A

A. Challinor and A. Lewis, Lensed CMB power spectra from all-sky correlation function s, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 103010 [astro-ph/0502425]

2005 arXiv
[11]

Lewis and A

A. Lewis and A. Challinor, Weak gravitational lensing of the CMB , Phys. Rept. 429 (2006) 1 [astro-ph/0601594]

2006 arXiv
[12]

Hanson, A

D. Hanson, A. Challinor and A. Lewis, Weak lensing of the CMB , Gen. Rel. Grav. 42 (2010) 2197 [0911.0612]

2010 arXiv
[13]

Lewis, A

A. Lewis, A. Challinor and D. Hanson, The shape of the CMB lensing bispectrum , JCAP 1103 (2011) 018 [1101.2234]

2011 arXiv
[14]

G. W. Pettinari, C. Fidler, R. Crittenden, K. Koyama, A. Lewis an d D. Wands, Impact of polarization on the intrinsic cosmic microwave background bispectrum, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 103010 [1406.2981]

2014 arXiv
[15]

Bonvin, C

C. Bonvin, C. Clarkson, R. Durrer, R. Maartens and O. Umeh, Do we care about the distance to the CMB? Clarifying the impact of second-order lensing , JCAP 1506 (2015) 050 [1503.07831]

2015 arXiv
[16]

Marozzi, G

G. Marozzi, G. Fanizza, E. Di Dio and R. Durrer, CMB-lensing beyond the Born approximation, JCAP 1609 (2016) 028 [1605.08761]

2016 arXiv
[17]

Marozzi, G

G. Marozzi, G. Fanizza, E. Di Dio and R. Durrer, Impact of Next-to-Leading Order Contributions to Cosmic Microwave Background Lensing , Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 211301 [1612.07650]

2017 arXiv
[18]

Marozzi, G

G. Marozzi, G. Fanizza, E. Di Dio and R. Durrer, CMB-lensing beyond the leading order: temperature and polarization anisotropies , Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 023535 [1612.07263]

2018 arXiv
[19]

Pratten and A

G. Pratten and A. Lewis, Impact of post-Born lensing on the CMB , JCAP 1608 (2016) 047 [1605.05662]

2016 arXiv
[20]

Lewis, A

A. Lewis, A. Hall and A. Challinor, Emission-angle and polarization-rotation eﬀects in the lensed CMB, JCAP 1708 (2017) 023 [1706.02673]

2017 arXiv
[21]

Di Dio, R

E. Di Dio, R. Durrer, G. Fanizza and G. Marozzi, Rotation of the CMB polarization by foreground lensing, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 043508 [1905.12573]

2019 arXiv
[22]

Di Dio, R

E. Di Dio, R. Durrer, G. Marozzi and F. Montanari, Galaxy number counts to second order and their bispectrum , JCAP 1412 (2014) 017 [1407.0376]

2014 arXiv
[23]

Bertacca, R

D. Bertacca, R. Maartens and C. Clarkson, Observed galaxy number counts on the lightcone up to second order: I. Main result , JCAP 1409 (2014) 037 [1405.4403]

2014 arXiv
[24]

Bertacca, R

D. Bertacca, R. Maartens and C. Clarkson, Observed galaxy number counts on the lightcone up to second order: II. Derivation , JCAP 1411 (2014) 013 [1406.0319]

2014 arXiv
[25]

Di Dio, R

E. Di Dio, R. Durrer, G. Marozzi and F. Montanari, The bispectrum of relativistic galaxy number counts, JCAP 1601 (2016) 016 [1510.04202]

2016 arXiv
[26]

J. T. Nielsen and R. Durrer, Higher order relativistic galaxy number counts: dominatin g terms, JCAP 1703 (2017) 010 [1606.02113]. – 104 –

2017 arXiv
[27]

Di Dio, H

E. Di Dio, H. Perrier, R. Durrer, G. Marozzi, A. Moradinezhad D izgah, J. Nore˜ na et al., Non-Gaussianities due to Relativistic Corrections to the O bserved Galaxy Bispectrum , JCAP 1703 (2017) 006 [1611.03720]

2017 arXiv
[28]

O. Umeh, S. Jolicoeur, R. Maartens and C. Clarkson, A general relativistic signature in the galaxy bispectrum: the local eﬀects of observing on the ligh tcone, JCAP 1703 (2017) 034 [1610.03351]

2017 arXiv
[29]

Jolicoeur, O

S. Jolicoeur, O. Umeh, R. Maartens and C. Clarkson, Imprints of local lightcone projection eﬀects on the galaxy bispectrum. Part II , JCAP 1709 (2017) 040 [1703.09630]

2017 arXiv
[30]

Jolicoeur, O

S. Jolicoeur, O. Umeh, R. Maartens and C. Clarkson, Imprints of local lightcone projection eﬀects on the galaxy bispectrum. Part III. Relativistic cor rections from nonlinear dynamical evolution on large-scales , JCAP 1803 (2018) 036 [1711.01812]

2018 arXiv
[31]

Jolicoeur, A

S. Jolicoeur, A. Allahyari, C. Clarkson, J. Larena, O. Umeh and R . Maartens, Imprints of local lightcone projection eﬀects on the galaxy bispectrum IV: Second-order vector and tensor contributions, JCAP 1903 (2019) 004 [1811.05458]

2019 arXiv
[32]

Koyama, O

K. Koyama, O. Umeh, R. Maartens and D. Bertacca, The observed galaxy bispectrum from single-ﬁeld inﬂation in the squeezed limit , JCAP 1807 (2018) 050 [1805.09189]

2018 arXiv
[33]

Di Dio, R

E. Di Dio, R. Durrer, R. Maartens, F. Montanari and O. Umeh, The Full-Sky Angular Bispectrum in Redshift Space , JCAP 1904 (2019) 053 [1812.09297]

2019 arXiv
[34]

Clarkson, E

C. Clarkson, E. M. de Weerd, S. Jolicoeur, R. Maartens and O. U meh, The dipole of the galaxy bispectrum, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 486 (2019) L101 [1812.09512]

2019 arXiv
[35]

Jalilvand, B

M. Jalilvand, B. Ghosh, E. Majerotto, B. Bose, R. Durrer and M . Kunz, Non-linear contributions to angular power spectra , 1907.13109

1907 arXiv
[36]

J. L. Fuentes, J. C. Hidalgo and K. A. Malik, Galaxy number counts at second order: an independent approach, 1908.08400

1908 arXiv
[37]

Bernardeau, C

F. Bernardeau, C. Bonvin and F. Vernizzi, Full-sky lensing shear at second order , Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 083002 [0911.2244]

2010 arXiv
[38]

Bernardeau, C

F. Bernardeau, C. Bonvin, N. Van de Rijt and F. Vernizzi, Cosmic shear bispectrum from second-order perturbations in General Relativity , Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 023001 [1112.4430]

2012 arXiv
[39]

O. Umeh, C. Clarkson and R. Maartens, Nonlinear relativistic corrections to cosmological distances, redshift and gravitational lensing magniﬁcati on: I. Key results , Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 202001 [1207.2109]

2014 arXiv
[40]

O. Umeh, C. Clarkson and R. Maartens, Nonlinear relativistic corrections to cosmological distances, redshift and gravitational lensing magniﬁcati on. II - Derivation , Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 205001 [1402.1933]

2014 arXiv
[41]

Andrianomena, C

S. Andrianomena, C. Clarkson, P. Patel, O. Umeh and J.-P. Uzan , Non-linear relativistic contributions to the cosmological weak-lensing convergen ce, JCAP 1406 (2014) 023 [1402.4350]

2014 arXiv
[42]

Marozzi, The luminosity distance–redshift relation up to second ord er in the Poisson gauge with anisotropic stress , Class

G. Marozzi, The luminosity distance–redshift relation up to second ord er in the Poisson gauge with anisotropic stress , Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015) 045004 [1406.1135]

2015 arXiv
[43]

Bonvin, C

C. Bonvin, C. Clarkson, R. Durrer, R. Maartens and O. Umeh, Cosmological ensemble and directional averages of observables , JCAP 1507 (2015) 040 [1504.01676]

2015 arXiv
[44]

Fanizza, J

G. Fanizza, J. Yoo and S. G. Biern, Non-linear general relativistic eﬀects in the observed redshift, JCAP 1809 (2018) 037 [1805.05959]

2018 arXiv
[45]

H. A. Gressel, C. Bonvin, M. Bruni and D. Bacon, Full-sky weak lensing: a nonlinear post-Friedmann treatment, JCAP 1905 (2019) 045 [1902.00059]. – 105 –

2019 arXiv
[46]

Challinor, Microwave background polarization in cosmological models , Phys

A. Challinor, Microwave background polarization in cosmological models , Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 043004 [astro-ph/9911481]

2000 arXiv
[47]

Challinor and F

A. Challinor and F. van Leeuwen, Peculiar velocity eﬀects in high resolution microwave background experiments, Phys. Rev. D65 (2002) 103001 [astro-ph/0112457]

2002 arXiv
[48]

Perlick, Gravitational Lensing from a Spacetime Perspective , Living Rev

V. Perlick, Gravitational Lensing from a Spacetime Perspective , Living Rev. Rel. (2010) [1010.3416]

2010 arXiv
[49]

Pitrou, J.-P

C. Pitrou, J.-P. Uzan and T. S. Pereira, Weak lensing B-modes on all scales as a probe of local isotropy, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 043003 [1203.6029]

2013 arXiv
[50]

Yoo, Relativistic Eﬀect in Galaxy Clustering , Class

J. Yoo, Relativistic Eﬀect in Galaxy Clustering , Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 234001 [1409.3223]

2014 arXiv
[51]

Yoo and M

J. Yoo and M. Zaldarriaga, Beyond the Linear-Order Relativistic Eﬀect in Galaxy Clust ering: Second-Order Gauge-Invariant Formalism, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 023513 [1406.4140]

2014 arXiv
[52]

S. C. Su and E. A. Lim, Formulating Weak Lensing from the Boltzmann Equation and Application to Lens-lens Couplings , Phys. Rev. D89 (2014) 123006 [1401.5737]

2014 arXiv
[53]

Pitrou, T

C. Pitrou, T. S. Pereira and J.-P. Uzan, Weak-lensing by the large scale structure in a spatially anisotropic universe: theory and predictions , Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 023501 [1503.01125]

2015 arXiv
[54]

Yoo and R

J. Yoo and R. Durrer, Gauge-Transformation Properties of Cosmological Observa bles and its Application to the Light-Cone Average , JCAP 1709 (2017) 016 [1705.05839]

2017 arXiv
[55]

Hellaby and A

C. Hellaby and A. Walters, Calculating observables in inhomogeneous cosmologies. Pa rt I: general framework, JCAP 1802 (2018) 015 [1708.01031]

2018 arXiv
[56]

Korzy´ nski and J

M. Korzy´ nski and J. Kopi´ nski,Optical drift eﬀects in general relativity , JCAP 1803 (2018) 012 [1711.00584]

2018 arXiv
[57]

J. Yoo, N. Grimm, E. Mitsou, A. Amara and A. Refregier, Gauge-Invariant Formalism of Cosmological Weak Lensing , JCAP 1804 (2018) 029 [1802.03403]

2018 arXiv
[58]

Grimm and J

N. Grimm and J. Yoo, Jacobi Mapping Approach for a Precise Cosmological Weak Len sing Formalism, JCAP 1807 (2018) 067 [1806.00017]

2018 arXiv
[59]

Grasso, M

M. Grasso, M. Korzy´ nski and J. Serbenta, Geometric optics in general relativity using bilocal operators, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 064038 [1811.10284]

2019 arXiv
[60]

O. H. Marcori, C. Pitrou, J.-P. Uzan and T. S. Pereira, Direction and redshift drifts for general observers and their applications in cosmology , Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 023517 [1805.12121]

2018 arXiv
[61]

Mitsou, J

E. Mitsou, J. Yoo, R. Durrer, F. Scaccabarozzi and V. Tanse lla, General and consistent statistics for cosmological observations , Phys. Rev. Research 2 (2020) 033004 [1905.01293]

2020 arXiv
[62]

J. Yoo, A. L. Fitzpatrick and M. Zaldarriaga, A New Perspective on Galaxy Clustering as a Cosmological Probe: General Relativistic Eﬀects , Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 083514 [0907.0707]

2009 arXiv
[63]

Yoo, General Relativistic Description of the Observed Galaxy Po wer Spectrum: Do We Understand What We Measure? , Phys

J. Yoo, General Relativistic Description of the Observed Galaxy Po wer Spectrum: Do We Understand What We Measure? , Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 083508 [1009.3021]

2010 arXiv
[64]

S. G. Biern and J. Yoo, Gauge-Invariance and Infrared Divergences in the Luminosi ty Distance, JCAP 1704 (2017) 045 [1606.01910]

2017 arXiv
[65]

S. G. Biern and J. Yoo, Correlation function of the luminosity distances , JCAP 1709 (2017) 026 [1704.07380]

2017 arXiv
[66]

Scaccabarozzi and J

F. Scaccabarozzi and J. Yoo, Light-Cone Observables and Gauge-Invariance in the Geodes ic Light-Cone Formalism, JCAP 1706 (2017) 007 [1703.08552]

2017 arXiv
[67]

Scaccabarozzi, J

F. Scaccabarozzi, J. Yoo and S. G. Biern, Galaxy Two-Point Correlation Function in General Relativity, JCAP 1810 (2018) 024 [1807.09796]. – 106 –

2018 arXiv
[68]

Yepez, Einstein’s vierbein ﬁeld theory of curved space , 1106.2037

J. Yepez, Einstein’s vierbein ﬁeld theory of curved space , 1106.2037

arXiv
[69]

G. F. R. Ellis, S. D. Nel, R. Maartens, W. R. Stoeger and A. P. Whit man, Ideal observational cosmology, Phys. Rep. 124 (1985) 315

1985
[70]

Nugier, Lightcone Averaging and Precision Cosmology , Ph.D

F. Nugier, Lightcone Averaging and Precision Cosmology , Ph.D. thesis, UPMC, Paris (main),
[71]

Gasperini, G

M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi, F. Nugier and G. Veneziano, Light-cone averaging in cosmology: Formalism and applications , JCAP 1107 (2011) 008 [1104.1167]

2011 arXiv
[72]

Ben-Dayan, M

I. Ben-Dayan, M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi, F. Nugier and G. Venez iano, Backreaction on the luminosity-redshift relation from gauge invariant light- cone averaging, JCAP 1204 (2012) 036 [1202.1247]

2012 arXiv
[73]

Ben-Dayan, G

I. Ben-Dayan, G. Marozzi, F. Nugier and G. Veneziano, The second-order luminosity-redshift relation in a generic inhomogeneous cosmology , JCAP 1211 (2012) 045 [1209.4326]

2012 arXiv
[74]

Ben-Dayan, M

I. Ben-Dayan, M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi, F. Nugier and G. Venez iano, Do stochastic inhomogeneities aﬀect dark-energy precision measurement s?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 021301 [1207.1286]

2013 arXiv
[75]

Ben-Dayan, M

I. Ben-Dayan, M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi, F. Nugier and G. Venez iano, Average and dispersion of the luminosity-redshift relation in the concordance mod el, JCAP 1306 (2013) 002 [1302.0740]

2013 arXiv
[76]

Fanizza, M

G. Fanizza, M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi and G. Veneziano, An exact Jacobi map in the geodesic light-cone gauge , JCAP 1311 (2013) 019 [1308.4935]

2013 arXiv
[77]

Fanizza and F

G. Fanizza and F. Nugier, Lensing in the geodesic light-cone coordinates and its (exa ct) illustration to an oﬀ-center observer in Lema ˆ ıtre-Tolman-Bondi models , JCAP 1502 (2015) 002 [1408.1604]

2015 arXiv
[78]

Fanizza, M

G. Fanizza, M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi and G. Veneziano, A new approach to the propagation of light-like signals in perturbed cosmological backgrounds , JCAP 1508 (2015) 020 [1506.02003]

2015 arXiv
[79]

Fleury, F

P. Fleury, F. Nugier and G. Fanizza, Geodesic-light-cone coordinates and the Bianchi I spacetime, JCAP 1606 (2016) 008 [1602.04461]

2016 arXiv
[80]

Mitsou, F

E. Mitsou, F. Scaccabarozzi and G. Fanizza, Observed Angles and Geodesic Light-Cone Coordinates, Class. Quant. Grav. 35 (2018) 107002 [1712.05675]

2018 arXiv
[81]

Fanizza, M

G. Fanizza, M. Gasperini, G. Marozzi and G. Veneziano, Observation angles, Fermi coordinates, and the Geodesic-Light-Cone gauge , JCAP 1901 (2019) 004 [1812.03671]

2019 arXiv
[82]

Clarkson, Roulettes: A weak lensing formalism for strong lensing - I

C. Clarkson, Roulettes: A weak lensing formalism for strong lensing - I. O verview, Class. Quant. Grav. 33 (2016) 16LT01 [1603.04698]

2016 arXiv
[83]

Clarkson, Roulettes: A weak lensing formalism for strong lensing - II

C. Clarkson, Roulettes: A weak lensing formalism for strong lensing - II. Derivation and analysis, Class. Quant. Grav. 33 (2016) 245003 [1603.04652]

2016 arXiv
[84]

Fleury, J

P. Fleury, J. Larena and J.-P. Uzan, Weak gravitational lensing of ﬁnite beams , Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 191101 [1706.09383]

2017 arXiv
[85]

Fleury, J

P. Fleury, J. Larena and J.-P. Uzan, Cosmic convergence and shear with extended sources , Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 023525 [1809.03919]

2019 arXiv
[86]

Fleury, J

P. Fleury, J. Larena and J.-P. Uzan, Weak lensing distortions beyond shear , Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 023526 [1809.03924]

2019 arXiv
[87]

Pitrou, The radiative transfer for polarized radiation at second or der in cosmological perturbations, Gen

C. Pitrou, The radiative transfer for polarized radiation at second or der in cosmological perturbations, Gen. Rel. Grav. 41 (2009) 2587 [0809.3245]

2009 arXiv
[88]

Pitrou, The Radiative transfer at second order: A Full treatment of t he Boltzmann equation with polarization , Class

C. Pitrou, The Radiative transfer at second order: A Full treatment of t he Boltzmann equation with polarization , Class. Quant. Grav. 26 (2009) 065006 [0809.3036]. – 107 –

2009 arXiv
[89]

Beneke and C

M. Beneke and C. Fidler, Boltzmann hierarchy for the cosmic microwave background at second order including photon polarization , Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 063509 [1003.1834]

2010 arXiv
[90]

Naruko, C

A. Naruko, C. Pitrou, K. Koyama and M. Sasaki, Second-order Boltzmann equation: gauge dependence and gauge invariance , Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 165008 [1304.6929]

2013 arXiv
[91]

Fidler and C

C. Fidler and C. Pitrou, Kinetic theory of fermions in curved spacetime , JCAP 1706 (2017) 013 [1701.08844]

2017 arXiv
[92]

Pitrou, Radiative transport of relativistic species in cosmology , 1902.09456

C. Pitrou, Radiative transport of relativistic species in cosmology , 1902.09456

1902 arXiv
[93]

Bernstein, Kinetic Theory In The Expanding Universe , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics

J. Bernstein, Kinetic Theory In The Expanding Universe , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K ., 1988, 10.1017/CBO9780511564185

1988 doi
[94]

Kosowsky, Cosmic microwave background polarization , Annals Phys

A. Kosowsky, Cosmic microwave background polarization , Annals Phys. 246 (1996) 49 [astro-ph/9501045]

1996 arXiv
[95]

Ma and E

C.-P. Ma and E. Bertschinger, Cosmological perturbation theory in the synchronous and conformal Newtonian gauges , Astrophys. J. 455 (1995) 7 [astro-ph/9506072]

1995 arXiv
[96]

Dodelson, Modern Cosmology

S. Dodelson, Modern Cosmology. Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2003

2003
[97]

Durrer, The Cosmic Microwave Background

R. Durrer, The Cosmic Microwave Background . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, 10.1017/CBO9780511817205

2008 doi
[98]

Weinberg, Cosmology

S. Weinberg, Cosmology. Oxford Univ. Pr., Oxford, UK, 2008

2008
[99]

Durrer, Gauge invariant cosmological perturbation theory: A Gener al study and its application to the texture scenario of structure formation , Fund

R. Durrer, Gauge invariant cosmological perturbation theory: A Gener al study and its application to the texture scenario of structure formation , Fund. Cosmic Phys. 15 (1994) 209 [astro-ph/9311041]

1994 arXiv
[100]

Durrer and A

R. Durrer and A. Neronov, Cosmological Magnetic Fields: Their Generation, Evolutio n and Observation, Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 21 (2013) 62 [1303.7121]

2013 arXiv
[101]

Becker, M

K. Becker, M. Becker and J. H. Schwarz, String theory and M-theory: A modern introduction . Cambridge University Press, 2006

2006
[102]

Schneider, J

P. Schneider, J. Ehlers and E. E. Falco, Gravitational Lenses. 1992, 10.1007/978-3-662-03758-4

1992 doi
[103]

Seitz, P

S. Seitz, P. Schneider and J. Ehlers, Light propagation in arbitrary space-times and the gravitational lens approximation , Class. Quant. Grav. 11 (1994) 2345 [astro-ph/9403056]

1994 arXiv
[104]

Bonvin, R

C. Bonvin, R. Durrer and M. A. Gasparini, Fluctuations of the luminosity distance , Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 023523 [astro-ph/0511183]

2006 arXiv
[105]

Bonvin, Eﬀect of Peculiar Motion in Weak Lensing , Phys

C. Bonvin, Eﬀect of Peculiar Motion in Weak Lensing , Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 123530 [0810.0180]

2008 arXiv
[106]

Fleury, H

P. Fleury, H. Dupuy and J.-P. Uzan, Interpretation of the Hubble diagram in a nonhomogeneous universe, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 123526 [1302.5308]

2013 arXiv
[107]

Fleury, C

P. Fleury, C. Pitrou and J.-P. Uzan, Light propagation in a homogeneous and anisotropic universe, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 043511 [1410.8473]

2015 arXiv
[108]

Fleury, Light propagation in inhomogeneous and anisotropic cosmol ogies, Ph.D

P. Fleury, Light propagation in inhomogeneous and anisotropic cosmol ogies, Ph.D. thesis, Paris, Inst. Astrophys., 2015. 1511.03702

2015 arXiv
[109]

L. P. Kadanoﬀ and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Mechanics . CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, 1989

1989
[110]

Berges, Introduction to nonequilibrium quantum ﬁeld theory , AIP Conf

J. Berges, Introduction to nonequilibrium quantum ﬁeld theory , AIP Conf. Proc. 739 (2004) 3 [hep-ph/0409233]. – 108 –

2004 arXiv
[111]

O. Buss, T. Gaitanos, K. Gallmeister, H. van Hees, M. Kaskulov , O. Lalakulich et al., Transport-theoretical Description of Nuclear Reactions, Phys. Rept. 512 (2012) 1 [1106.1344]

2012 arXiv
[112]

R. F. Streater and A. S. Wightman, PCT, spin and statistics, and all that . Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, USA, 1989

1989
[113]

A. D. Dolgov, Neutrinos in the Early Universe , Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 33 (1981) 700

1981
[114]

Barbieri and A

R. Barbieri and A. Dolgov, Neutrino oscillations in the early universe , Nucl. Phys. B349 (1991) 743

1991
[115]

Sigl and G

G. Sigl and G. Raﬀelt, General kinetic description of relativistic mixed neutrin os, Nucl. Phys. B406 (1993) 423

1993
[116]

Raﬀelt, G

G. Raﬀelt, G. Sigl and L. Stodolsky, NonAbelian Boltzmann equation for mixing and decoherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 2363 [hep-ph/9209276]

1993 arXiv
[117]

Vlasenko, G

A. Vlasenko, G. M. Fuller and V. Cirigliano, Neutrino Quantum Kinetics , Phys. Rev. D89 (2014) 105004 [1309.2628]

2014 arXiv
[118]

Volpe, Neutrino Quantum Kinetic Equations , Int

C. Volpe, Neutrino Quantum Kinetic Equations , Int. J. Mod. Phys. E24 (2015) 1541009 [1506.06222]

2015 arXiv
[119]

C. Y. Cardall, Liouville equations for neutrino distribution matrices , Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 085017 [0712.1188]

2008 arXiv
[120]

Weinberg, The Quantum theory of ﬁelds

S. Weinberg, The Quantum theory of ﬁelds. Vol. 1: Foundations . Cambridge University Press, 2005

2005
[121]

M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to quantum ﬁeld theory . Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995

1995
[122]

J. M. Martin-Garcia, xAct: eﬃcient tensor computer algebra for Mathematica
[123]

D. A. Varshalovich, A. N. Moskalev and V. K. Khersonsky, Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum: Irreducible Tensors, Spherical Harmonics, Vect or Coupling Coeﬃcients, 3nj Symbols. World Scientiﬁc, Singapore, 1988. – 109 –

1988

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Komatsu, K

E. Komatsu, K. M. Smith, J. Dunkley, C. L. Bennett, B. Gold, G. H inshaw et al., Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations : Cosmological Interpretation , The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 192 (2011) 18 [ 1001.4538]

arXiv 2011

[2] [2]

Planck Collaboration et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters , arXiv e-prints (2018) [ 1807.06209]

arXiv 2018

[3] [3]

Planck Collaboration et al., Planck 2018 results. I. Overview and the cosmological legac y of Planck, arXiv e-prints (2018) [ 1807.06205]

arXiv 2018

[4] [4]

SDSS collaboration, Cosmological Constraints from the SDSS Luminous Red Galaxi es, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 123507 [astro-ph/0608632]

arXiv 2006

[5] [5]

M. Levi, C. Bebek, T. Beers, R. Blum, R. Cahn, D. Eisenstein et al., The DESI Experiment, a whitepaper for Snowmass 2013 , ArXiv e-prints (2013) [ 1308.0847]

arXiv 2013

[6] [6]

C. W. Stubbs, D. Sweeney, J. A. Tyson and LSST Collaboration, An Overview of the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) System , in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, vol. 36 of Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society , p. 108.02, Dec., 2004. – 103 –

2004

[7] [7]

Green, P

J. Green, P. Schechter, C. Baltay, R. Bean, D. Bennett, R. Br own et al., Wide-Field InfraRed Survey Telescope (WFIRST) Final Report , 1208.4012

arXiv

[8] [8]

P. E. Dewdney, P. J. Hall, R. T. Schilizzi and T. J. L. W. Lazio, The Square Kilometre Array , IEEE Proceedings 97 (2009) 1482

2009