Pith. sign in

REVIEW 11 cited by

Dark Energy Survey Year 3 Results: Cosmology from Cosmic Shear and Robustness to Modeling Uncertainty

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2105.13544 v2 pith:JHTOD2YJ submitted 2021-05-28 astro-ph.CO

L. F. Secco , S. Samuroff , E. Krause , B. Jain , J. Blazek , M. Raveri , A. Campos , A. Amon
show 146 more authors
A. Chen C. Doux A. Choi D. Gruen G. M. Bernstein C. Chang J. DeRose J. Myles A. Ferté P. Lemos D. Huterer J. Prat M. A. Troxel N. MacCrann A. R. Liddle T. Kacprzak X. Fang C. Sánchez S. Pandey S. Dodelson P. Chintalapati K. Hoffmann A. Alarcon O. Alves F. Andrade-Oliveira E. J. Baxter K. Bechtol M. R. Becker A. Brandao-Souza H. Camacho A. Carnero Rosell M. Carrasco Kind R. Cawthon J. P. Cordero M. Crocce C. Davis E. Di Valentino A. Drlica-Wagner K. Eckert T. F. Eifler M. Elidaiana F. Elsner J. Elvin-Poole S. Everett P. Fosalba O. Friedrich M. Gatti G. Giannini R. A. Gruendl I. Harrison W. G. Hartley K. Herner H. Huang E. M. Huff M. Jarvis N. Jeffrey N. Kuropatkin P. -F. Leget J. Muir J. Mccullough A. Navarro Alsina Y. Omori Y. Park A. Porredon R. Rollins A. Roodman R. Rosenfeld A. J. Ross E. S. Rykoff J. Sanchez I. Sevilla-Noarbe E. S. Sheldon T. Shin I. Tutusaus T. N. Varga N. Weaverdyck R. H. Wechsler B. Yanny B. Yin Y. Zhang J. Zuntz T. M. C. Abbott M. Aguena S. Allam J. Annis D. Bacon E. Bertin S. Bhargava S. L. Bridle D. Brooks E. Buckley-Geer D. L. Burke J. Carretero M. Costanzi L. N. da Costa J. De Vicente H. T. Diehl J. P. Dietrich P. Doel I. Ferrero B. Flaugher J. Frieman J. García-Bellido E. Gaztanaga D. W. Gerdes T. Giannantonio J. Gschwend G. Gutierrez S. R. Hinton D. L. Hollowood K. Honscheid B. Hoyle D. J. James T. Jeltema K. Kuehn O. Lahav M. Lima H. Lin M. A. G. Maia J. L. Marshall P. Martini P. Melchior F. Menanteau R. Miquel J. J. Mohr R. Morgan R. L. C. Ogando A. Palmese F. Paz-Chinchón D. Petravick A. Pieres A. A. Plazas Malagón M. Rodriguez-Monroy A. K. Romer E. Sanchez V. Scarpine M. Schubnell D. Scolnic S. Serrano M. Smith M. Soares-Santos E. Suchyta M. E. C. Swanson G. Tarle D. Thomas C. To (the DES Collaboration)
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords cosmicsheardataconstraintsdarkenergylambdasigma
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

This work and its companion paper, Amon et al. (2021), present cosmic shear measurements and cosmological constraints from over 100 million source galaxies in the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Year 3 data. We constrain the lensing amplitude parameter $S_8\equiv\sigma_8\sqrt{\Omega_\textrm{m}/0.3}$ at the 3% level in $\Lambda$CDM: $S_8=0.759^{+0.025}_{-0.023}$ (68% CL). Our constraint is at the 2% level when using angular scale cuts that are optimized for the $\Lambda$CDM analysis: $S_8=0.772^{+0.018}_{-0.017}$ (68% CL). With cosmic shear alone, we find no statistically significant constraint on the dark energy equation-of-state parameter at our present statistical power. We carry out our analysis blind, and compare our measurement with constraints from two other contemporary weak-lensing experiments: the Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS) and Hyper-Suprime Camera Subaru Strategic Program (HSC). We additionally quantify the agreement between our data and external constraints from the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). Our DES Y3 result under the assumption of $\Lambda$CDM is found to be in statistical agreement with Planck 2018, although favors a lower $S_8$ than the CMB-inferred value by $2.3\sigma$ (a $p$-value of 0.02). This paper explores the robustness of these cosmic shear results to modeling of intrinsic alignments, the matter power spectrum and baryonic physics. We additionally explore the statistical preference of our data for intrinsic alignment models of different complexity. The fiducial cosmic shear model is tested using synthetic data, and we report no biases greater than 0.3$\sigma$ in the plane of $S_8\times\Omega_\textrm{m}$ caused by uncertainties in the theoretical models.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 11 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Primordial Physics in the Nonlinear Universe: Revealing the oscillating halo bias from cosmological collider models

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    A binning-based IC method yields the first N-body measurements of oscillating halo bias from cosmological collider bispectra, with mass- and assembly-dependent phases fit by peak-background-split theory.

  2. General Relativistic Entropic Acceleration at the perturbation level: a CLASS implementation and first Boltzmann-code constraints

    gr-qc 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    First full Boltzmann-code implementation of entropic dark energy, with MCMC constraints from CMB+BAO+SN, yields α≈1 and a fit statistically indistinguishable from ΛCDM.

  3. Cosmic Shear constraints from HSC Year 3 with clustering calibration of the tomographic redshift distributions from DESI

    astro-ph.CO 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Reanalysis of HSC Y3 cosmic shear with DESI clustering redshift calibration yields S8 = 0.805 ± 0.018, a 1.8× error reduction and upward shift toward Planck cosmology.

  4. Cosmology from a joint analysis of second and third order shear statistics with Subaru Hyper Suprime-Cam Year 3 data

    astro-ph.CO 2025-08 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    The body is a DES-Y3 analysis showing a 111% figure-of-merit gain from adding aperture-mass skewness to two-point shear, but the abstract's HSC-Y3 headline numbers do not appear anywhere in the text.

  5. Baryonification II: Constraining feedback with X-ray and kinematic Sunyaev-Zel'dovich observations

    astro-ph.CO 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ACT kSZ and eROSITA gas fractions are mutually consistent in a baryonification fit and imply strong feedback, with predicted matter power suppression reaching 20-25 percent at k=5 h/Mpc.

  6. Cosmology and Source Redshift Constraints from Galaxy Clustering and Tomographic Weak Lensing with HSC Y3 and SDSS using the Point-Mass Correction Model

    astro-ph.CO 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Galaxy clustering plus weak lensing from HSC Y3 and SDSS gives S8 = 0.780 ± 0.030 and lensing-only redshift offsets Δz3 = -0.112, Δz4 = -0.185.

  7. Background-level reconstruction of scalar-field potentials from dark-energy histories and comparison with analytic potential families

    astro-ph.CO 2026-03 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    A background reconstruction maps prescribed ρ_de(z) histories to V(φ) and ranks analytic potentials by Bayesian evidence, with exponential preferred for CPL and shifted-tanh for sign-switching targets.

  8. Hubble Tension as an Effect of Horizon Entanglement Nonequilibrium

    astro-ph.CO 2026-01 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A phenomenological 'horizon entanglement deficit' with the form ρ ∝ H² is fit to low-z data under a forced H0=73 prior; the nonzero amplitude is a restatement of that prior.

  9. Low-redshift constraints on structure growth from CMB lensing tomography

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Low-redshift galaxy clustering and CMB lensing tomography with hybrid effective field theory gives S8=0.79±0.06, consistent with Planck, while data alone prefer Ωm=0.245±0.024.

  10. Mitigating Model Misspecification in Simulation-Based Inference for Galaxy Clustering

    astro-ph.CO 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A two-step method (coefficient pruning plus learned robust transformation) fixes model misspecification in the SimBIG wavelet-scattering analysis of BOSS galaxy clustering and produces tight Lambda-CDM constraints.

  11. Line-of-sight shear in SLACS strong lenses II: validation tests with an extended sample

    astro-ph.CO 2025-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Line-of-sight shear in 45 SLACS lenses is often larger than N-body expectations (mean |γ_LOS| ≈ 0.085–0.11), and adding mass octupoles or checking image properties does not remove the excess.

Pith tools