Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Mitigating Nonlinear Systematics in Weak Lensing Surveys: The Bernardeau-Nishimichi-Taruya Approach

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Weak lensing scale cuts that use the BNT transform preserve cosmological constraints while removing small-scale theoretical bias.

desk verdict BNT scale cuts are a genuinely promising recipe for Stage-IV cosmic shear, but the claimed robustness to the fiducial cosmology is asserted, not tested. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14704 v2 pith:DHMJB3S3 submitted 2024-12-19 astro-ph.CO

Shiming Gu , Ludovic van Waerbeke , Francis Bernardeau , Roohi Dalal This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords weaklensingcosmicshearBNTtransformscalecutsleakagenonlinearmatterpowerspectrumS8tensiontomography
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
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

Weak lensing measures mass in projection, so small-scale uncertainties in the matter power spectrum bleed into every angular scale. This paper argues that the standard remedy—cutting small angular scales—is both inefficient and insufficient, because an angular cut is not the same as a physical-scale cut. It proposes instead to apply the Bernardeau-Nishimichi-Taruya (BNT) transform, a linear rearrangement of tomographic lensing kernels, before cutting in angular frequency. In BNT space the connection between angular scale and three-dimensional wavenumber is much tighter, so a cut in $\ell$ behaves nearly like a cut in $k$ and the problematic small-scale modes can be discarded while the cosmological signal is kept. Forecasts using several competing nonlinear power-spectrum models show the BNT approach recovering unbiased cosmological parameters where the standard approach fails.

What carries the argument

The BNT transform, a linear invertible matrix applied to tomographic cosmic-shear spectra, constructed by requiring each new lensing kernel to have vanishing zeroth and first redshift moments (Eqs. 6 and 7), so that kernels from bins more than one apart no longer overlap. This is what localizes lenses in redshift and makes an $\ell$-cut approximate a $k$-cut. The accompanying machinery is the ratio $R(k_{\mathrm{cut}}, \Pi_0)$ defining a tolerance band $1 \pm T_{\mathrm{FD}}$, and the leakage statistic $R = \chi^2[k > k_{\mathrm{cut}}, \ell < \ell_{\mathrm{cut}}] / \chi^2[\ell < \ell_{\mathrm{cut}}]$ (Eq. 25) that measures how much small-scale model-dependent power remains in the kept data.

What would settle it

Run the same forecast pipeline on a mock survey produced with a nonlinear power spectrum that is deliberately far from the fiducial cosmology (for example, $S_8$ below 0.7 or strong baryonic suppression), then evaluate the leakage ratio of Eq. (25) for each tomographic pair below its $\ell_{\mathrm{cut}}$; if the ratio rises substantially above the value predicted near the fiducial cosmology, the claimed equivalence between $\ell$-cut and $k$-cut is broken.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that an angular-scale cut applied to BNT-transformed weak lensing spectra is a close proxy for a physical wavenumber cut in the three-dimensional density field, whereas in standard tomographic spectra the same cut still admits substantial leakage from high-$k$ modes. The BNT transform linearly combines lensing kernels from consecutive redshift bins so that each new kernel is localized in redshift, which in turn aligns $\ell$ with $k$. The paper quantifies the alignment with the ratio $R^{(a,b)}(\ell; k_{\mathrm{cut}}, \Pi_0)$, the fraction of a given spectrum contributed by modes with $k < k_{\mathrm{cut}}$, and defines per-bin $\ell$-cuts by requiring this ratio to stay within $1 \pm T_{\mathrm{FD}}$ of unity. For BNT spectra the transition between sensitive and insensitive $\ell$ is sharp; for standard spectra, even very low $\ell$ are affected by a cut at $k_{\mathrm{cut}} = 0.3\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$. A new leakage statistic, the fraction of $\chi^2$ coming from $k > k_{\mathrm{cut}}$ below the cut, shows that BNT reduces leakage by a large factor across the whole $(k_{\mathrm{cut}}, T_{\mathrm{FD}})$ plane. In forecast analyses where the true nonlinear power spectrum is described by Halofit, the Baryon Correction Model, or an axion dark-matter model while the likelihood assumes a different model, ordinary scale cuts either leave a significant bias in $S_8$ and $\Omega_m$ or destroy the constraints; the BNT analysis recovers the fiducial values within one $\sigma$ with only modest degradation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the cosmology used to build the BNT transform is close enough to the true cosmology that imperfect nulling still leaves angular cuts behaving like physical cuts; if the true cosmology were far from that fiducial, the new kernels could overlap and small-scale modes could leak back into the kept data.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With BNT, a survey can keep data out to $\ell \simeq 5000$ while enforcing a strict cut at $k_{\mathrm{cut}} \simeq 1.5\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$, whereas the standard approach with the same strictness reaches only $\ell \simeq 300$.
  • Marginalizing over a baryon-feedback nuisance parameter does not by itself remove nonlinear-model bias in Stage-IV analyses; scale cuts on BNT data do.
  • BNT constraints degrade gently as $k_{\mathrm{cut}}$ or the tolerance $T_{\mathrm{FD}}$ is tightened, while noBNT constraints inflate rapidly and can vanish entirely, e.g. no constraints at $k_{\mathrm{cut}} = 0.1\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$, $T_{\mathrm{FD}} = 0.02$.
  • If the true nonlinear power spectrum differs from the assumed one, through baryons or ultralight axion dark matter, the BNT analysis recovers the fiducial $S_8$ and $\Omega_m$ within $1\sigma$, while the standard analysis is biased by several sigma or loses all constraining power.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The leakage statistic $R$ could be used on real data as an operational diagnostic: compute it bin-by-bin and down-weight any tomographic pair whose measured leakage exceeds the fiducial prediction, rather than relying on a fixed global $k_{\mathrm{cut}}$.
  • Because the BNT transform is linear and invertible, the same $\ell$-to-$k$ alignment should carry over to convergence maps and higher-order statistics, so the method's reach likely extends beyond the power-spectrum forecasts made here.
  • A practical implementation will need an iterative scheme: estimate cosmological parameters, rebuild the BNT matrix, and check that the derived cuts do not move; the paper argues residual shifts are negligible, but quantifying this drift on real data would settle the point.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that applying scale cuts in harmonic space to BNT-transformed weak lensing data behaves much more like a k-space cut than conventional tomographic scale cuts, so that theoretical uncertainties in the nonlinear matter power spectrum can be controlled with less information loss. The authors define a leakage estimator R, construct ℓ-cuts from the ratio R(kcut, Π0) with a tolerance TFD, and run MCMC forecasts for Euclid-like surveys, comparing analyses based on HMcode against mock data generated with Halofit, the Baryon Correction Model, and AxionHMcode. Their central claims are that BNT-transformed data retain cosmological constraining power for small kcut and TFD, while conventional noBNT analyses either lose constraining power or remain biased after marginalizing over nuisance parameters.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a practical and timely method for Stage-IV weak lensing surveys to mitigate nonlinear and baryonic systematics without discarding as much information as standard scale cuts. The manuscript has clear strengths: the theoretical framework is laid out explicitly, the calculations use public tools (CCL, OneCovariance, Nautilus, Getdist), and the code is made available on GitHub, which strengthens reproducibility. The introduction of a quantitative scale-leakage diagnostic is a useful contribution in itself. The main limitation is that the advertised robustness of the method to the fiducial cosmology used for the BNT transform and for setting the cuts is asserted rather than demonstrated, and the forecast setup does not exercise that failure mode. This is fixable and does not undermine the overall framework, but it is load-bearing for the paper's main advantage claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III A, unnumbered paragraph after Eq. (19)] This is load-bearing because the central advertised advantage is that an ℓ-space cut is much closer to a k-space cut; if the cut calibration is sensitive to the assumed cosmology, the advantage may degrade in real analyses.
  2. [Section IV A, covariance paragraph] This is load-bearing for the numerical claims of bias significance and information retention, even though the qualitative BNT/noBNT hierarchy may survive.
  3. [Section III B, Eq. (29)] This is a diagnostic, not a fit, so it is not circular, but its model dependence needs to be quantified for the estimator to be a reliable tool.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure 2 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'dashed ines' should be 'dashed lines'.
  2. [Figure 5] The legend uses 'FD' instead of 'TFD' in multiple places, which is confusing because TFD is the threshold parameter defined in Section III A.
  3. [Figure 8 caption] The caption reads 'Sam as Figure 7' and should read 'Same as Figure 7'.
  4. [Section IV C] There is a typo in 'the haracteristic scale' near the BCM setup description; it should be 'the characteristic scale'.
  5. [Notation, Eqs. (19) and (25)] The symbol R is used both for the cut-ratio in Eq. (19) and for the leakage ratio in Eq. (25). These are different quantities, and this can be confusing; consider using a distinct symbol such as L for the leakage ratio.
  6. [Section IV A, parameter sampling] The sentence 'we have verified that the results do not change significantly' when fixing multiplicative biases and redshift errors is not accompanied by any details of the verification; please state what was checked and the size of the change.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the BNT ℓ-cut recipe is self-contained and the forecasts are not statistically forced.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain does not reduce to its inputs. The BNT coefficients p_i^a are solved from the geometric integrals n0_i and n1_i in Eqs. (3)-(7), independently of the matter power spectrum and of the data vector, and the transform is applied as a fixed linear operation; the kernel localization that carries the ℓ-to-k claim is computed explicitly in Figures 2 and 4 rather than assumed from the cited BNT papers. The ℓ-cuts are chosen from the fiducial-cosmology ratio R in Eq. (19) and threshold TFD; these are a cut recipe, not parameters fitted to the mock observations. The forecasts in Section IV deliberately generate mock data with Halofit, BCM, or AxionHMcode while sampling with HMcode, so the unbiased posteriors are not guaranteed by construction. The scale-leakage estimator R in Eqs. (25)-(29) is a diagnostic decomposition of the chi-squared into k>kcut contributions, not a fitted prediction. The main caveat, that using a wrong fiducial cosmology for the transform and cuts could degrade nulling, is asserted in Section III A rather than tested; however, that is a testable robustness assumption and a potential correctness gap, not a circular step, because the claim does not define its conclusion into its premises. Self-citation of Bernardeau et al. (2014) is present but not load-bearing, since the defining equations and the numerical kernel properties are reproduced in this paper.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the geometric localization of the BNT transform, plus a set of modeling assumptions about the nonlinear power spectrum and the covariance. No new physical entities are introduced; the scale-leakage estimator R is a diagnostic constructed from existing quantities.

free parameters (3)
  • kcut = 0.1, 0.33, 1.0 Mpc^-1
    Hand-chosen thresholds defining the maximum k-mode considered trustworthy. The central claim is tested across these values, not fitted.
  • TFD = 0.1, 0.02, 0.004
    Hand-chosen tolerance threshold for the fractional deviation of the cut data vector from the full data vector. Determines how strict the ℓ-cut is.
  • (Amod, S8) shift = (0.827, 0.767)
    Chosen to mimic the observed S8 tension (KiDS-1000) for the scale-leakage illustration in Eq. 29. The value of Amod is obtained by a one-parameter χ2 minimization.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Limber approximation and flat-sky geometry are used to compute C(ℓ) from P(k).
    Eq. 1 adopts the Limber approximation with k = (ℓ+1/2)/χ. Standard in cosmic shear.
  • domain assumption The BNT transform coefficients pa_i depend only on the source redshift distributions, not on P(k).
    Section II A, Eqs. 6-7. This is the geometric foundation that makes the ℓ-cut approximate a k-cut.
  • domain assumption The approximation ΔC[k1,k2](Π) ≈ W[k1,k2](Π0) ΔD(Π) is valid to within 5%.
    Appendix A, Eq. A3. Used for the δχ2 diagnostic. The paper tests this on random cosmologies and k-bins but does not prove it.
  • domain assumption The four nonlinear power spectrum models (HMcode, Halofit, BCM, AxionHMcode) span the plausible range of true nonlinear P(k) for Stage IV surveys.
    Section IV A. The bias-mitigation claim is demonstrated only against these models.
  • domain assumption The covariance matrix from OneCovariance accurately describes the statistical errors of a Euclid-like survey.
    Section IV A. The forecasts use this covariance to compute posterior contours and bias significances.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mitigating Nonlinear Systematics in Weak Lensing Surveys: The Bernardeau-Nishimichi-Taruya Approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DHMJB3S3

@misc{pith2026241214704,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mitigating Nonlinear Systematics in Weak Lensing Surveys: The Bernardeau-Nishimichi-Taruya Approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DHMJB3S3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14704}
}
abstract

Weak lensing surveys, along with most other late-Universe probes, have consistently measured a lower amplitude of the matter fluctuation spectrum, denoted by the parameter $S_8$, compared to predictions from early-Universe measurements in cosmic microwave background data. Improper modelling of nonlinear scales may partially explain these discrepancies in lensing surveys. This study investigates whether the conventional approach to addressing small-scale biases remains optimal for Stage-IV lensing surveys. We demonstrate that conventional weak lensing estimators are affected by scale leakage from theoretical biases at nonlinear scales, which influence all observed scales. Using the BNT transform, we propose an $\ell$-cut methodology that effectively controls this leakage. The Bernardeau-Nishimichi-Taruya (BNT) transform reorganises weak lensing data in $\ell$ space, aligning it with $k$ space, thereby reducing the mixing of nonlinear scales and providing a more accurate interpretation of the data. We evaluate the BNT approach by comparing HMcode, Halofit, Baryon Correction Model and AxionHMcode mass power spectrum models using Euclid-like survey configurations. Additionally, we introduce a new estimator to quantify scale leakage in both the BNT and noBNT approaches. Our findings show that BNT outperforms traditional methods, preserving cosmological constraints while significantly mitigating theoretical biases.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.14704 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The BNT transform matrix [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Upper panel: Tomographic bins for the Euclid survey. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows Rˆ (a,b) (ℓ; kcut, Π0 ) and R(i,j) (ℓ; kcut, Π0 ) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. All curves use [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Colourmap of the ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Constraints in the (Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: presents the posterior of the two-dimensional parameter space (S8, Ωm), with kcut = 0.33 Mpc−1 for three values of TFD: 0.1, 0.02, and 0.004. The increase in contour size for decreasing TFD is highly significant for the noBNT case, whereas it is surprisingly marginal f…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Same as Figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Same as Figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: , we illustrate how using a fuzzy dark mat￾ter model for the data vector while employing conven￾tional HMcode likelihood sampling can result in biased cosmological parameters. The fuzzy dark matter data vector is calculated with AxionHMcode [36], a nonlin￾ear recipe c…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. KiDS-Legacy: The consistency test of the large-scale structure with Bernardeau-Nishimichi-Taruya transform

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    BNT k-cuts on KiDS-Legacy give S8=0.798±0.045 (theory covariance) with no nonlinear bias, while observed-data covariance produces a mild low-k preference for lower S8.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Aghanim, Y

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ash- down, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, S. Basak, R. Battye, K. Benabed, J. P. Bernard, M. Bersanelli, P. Bielewicz, J. J. Bock, J. R. Bond, J. Borrill, F. R. Bouchet, F. Boulanger, M. Bucher, C. Burigana, R. C. Butler, E. Calabrese, J. F. Cardoso, J. Ca...

    arXiv 2020

  2. [2]

    Abdalla, G

    E. Abdalla, G. F. Abell´ an, A. Aboubrahim, A. Agnello, ¨O. Akarsu, Y. Akrami, G. Alestas, D. Aloni, L. Amen- dola, L. A. Anchordoqui, R. I. Anderson, N. Arendse, M. Asgari, M. Ballardini, V. Barger, S. Basilakos, R. C. Batista, E. S. Battistelli, R. Battye, M. Benetti, D. Benisty, A. Berlin, P. de Bernardis, E. Berti, B. Bidenko, S. Birrer, J. P. Blakesl...

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    E. D. Di Valentino, Challenges of the Standard Cosmo- logical Model, Universe 8, 399 (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Bartelmann and P

    M. Bartelmann and P. Schneider, Weak gravitational lensing, Physics Reports 340, 291 (2001), arXiv:astro- ph/9912508 [astro-ph]

    work page arXiv 2001

  5. [5]

    Laureijs, J

    R. Laureijs, J. Amiaux, S. Arduini, J. L. Augu` eres, J. Brinchmann, R. Cole, M. Cropper, C. Dabin, L. Du- vet, A. Ealet, B. Garilli, P. Gondoin, L. Guzzo, J. Hoar, H. Hoekstra, R. Holmes, T. Kitching, T. Maciaszek, Y. Mellier, F. Pasian, W. Percival, J. Rhodes, G. Saave- dra Criado, M. Sauvage, R. Scaramella, L. Valenziano, S. Warren, R. Bender, F. Casta...

    arXiv 2011

  6. [6]

    LSST Science Collaboration, P. A. Abell, J. Allison, S. F. Anderson, J. R. Andrew, J. R. P. Angel, L. Ar- mus, D. Arnett, S. J. Asztalos, T. S. Axelrod, S. Bai- ley, D. R. Ballantyne, J. R. Bankert, W. A. Barkhouse, J. D. Barr, L. F. Barrientos, A. J. Barth, J. G. Bartlett, A. C. Becker, J. Becla, T. C. Beers, J. P. Bernstein, R. Biswas, M. R. Blanton, J....

    arXiv 2009

  7. [7]

    H. Zhan, The wide-field multiband imaging and slitless spectroscopy survey to be carried out by the survey space telescope of china manned space program, Chinese Sci- ence Bulletin 66, 1290 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    N. E. Chisari, Essay: Mapping Luminous and Dark Mat- ter in the Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 080001 (2025), 20 arXiv:2502.06644 [hep-th]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Bechtol, S

    K. Bechtol, S. Birrer, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, K. Schutz, S. Adhikari, M. Amin, A. Banerjee, S. Bird, N. Blinov, K. K. Boddy, C. Boehm, K. Bundy, M. Buschmann, S. Chakrabarti, D. Curtin, L. Dai, A. Drlica-Wagner, C. Dvorkin, A. L. Erickcek, D. Gilman, S. Heeba, S. Kim, V. Irˇ siˇ c,...

    2022 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Additionally, the bottom-left panel shows that re- ducing kcut has a similar effect to decreasing TFD. B. Scale Leakage Scale leakage refers to the contribution of the k > kcut modes to a data vector restricted toℓ < ℓcut. Quantifying scale leakage is essential as it provides ...

  3. [11]

    Mellier, Probing the Universe with Weak Lensing, ARA & A 37, 127 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9812172 [astro- ph]

    Y. Mellier, Probing the Universe with Weak Lensing, ARA & A 37, 127 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9812172 [astro- ph]

    1999 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Hu, Power Spectrum Tomography with Weak Lens- ing, ApJL 522, L21 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9904153 [astro-ph]

    W. Hu, Power Spectrum Tomography with Weak Lens- ing, ApJL 522, L21 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9904153 [astro-ph]

    1999 arXiv

  5. [13]

    For this reason, we chose to focus exclusively on the angular power spectrum

    where scale cuts exhibit strong oscillatory behavior across a wide range of ℓ values. For this reason, we chose to focus exclusively on the angular power spectrum. In Section IV, we will perform MCMC analysis, and the comparison of posterior contours for noBNT and BNT will fur...

    2016

  6. [14]

    Kaiser and G

    N. Kaiser and G. Squires, Mapping the Dark Matter with Weak Gravitational Lensing, Astrophys. J.404, 441 (1993)

    1993

  7. [15]

    Sugiyama, H

    S. Sugiyama, H. Miyatake, S. More, X. Li, M. Shirasaki, M. Takada, Y. Kobayashi, R. Takahashi, T. Nishimichi, A. J. Nishizawa, M. M. Rau, T. Zhang, R. Dalal, R. Man- delbaum, M. A. Strauss, T. Hamana, M. Oguri, K. Os- ato, A. Kannawadi, B.-C. Hsieh, W. Luo, R. Arm- strong, J. ...

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Dalal, X

    R. Dalal, X. Li, A. Nicola, J. Zuntz, M. A. Strauss, S. Sugiyama, T. Zhang, M. M. Rau, R. Mandelbaum, M. Takada, S. More, H. Miyatake, A. Kannawadi, M. Shirasaki, T. Taniguchi, R. Takahashi, K. Osato, T. Hamana, M. Oguri, A. J. Nishizawa, A. A. P. Malag´ on, T. Sunayama, D. Al...

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Asgari, C.-A

    M. Asgari, C.-A. Lin, B. Joachimi, B. Giblin, C. Hey- mans, H. Hildebrandt, A. Kannawadi, B. St¨ olzner, T. Tr¨ oster, J. L. van den Busch, A. H. Wright, M. Bil- icki, C. Blake, J. de Jong, A. Dvornik, T. Erben, F. Get- man, H. Hoekstra, F. K¨ ohlinger, K. Kuijken, L. Miller, ...

    2021 arXiv

  10. [18]

    T. M. C. Abbott, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon, S. Allam, O. Alves, A. Amon, F. Andrade-Oliveira, J. Annis, S. Avila, D. Bacon, E. Baxter, K. Bechtol, M. R. Becker, G. M. Bernstein, S. Bhargava, S. Birrer, J. Blazek, A. Brandao-Souza, S. L. Bridle, D. Brooks, E. Buckley- Geer, D. L. B...

    2022 arXiv

  11. [19]

    P. L. Taylor, F. Bernardeau, and E. Huff, x -cut Cosmic shear: Optimally removing sensitivity to baryonic and nonlinear physics with an application to the Dark En- ergy Survey year 1 shear data, Phys. Rev. D 103, 043531 (2021), arXiv:2007.00675 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    23) truncated by the boolean filter V(kcut, TFD) (resp

    The χ2 (Eq.16) and the incremental δχ2 (Eq.18) are calculated using the global data vector and covari- ance matrix (Eq. 23) truncated by the boolean filter V(kcut, TFD) (resp. ˆV(kcut, TFD)). For practical imple- mentation details, we direct the reader to Appendix A, specifica...

  13. [21]

    Bernardeau, T

    F. Bernardeau, T. Nishimichi, and A. Taruya, Cosmic shear full nulling: sorting out dynamics, geometry and systematics, MNRAS 445, 1526 (2014), arXiv:1312.0430 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  14. [22]

    P. L. Taylor, F. Bernardeau, and T. D. Kitching, k -cut cosmic shear: Tunable power spectrum sensitiv- ity to test gravity, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083514 (2018), arXiv:1809.03515 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Blanchard, S

    Euclid Collaboration, A. Blanchard, S. Camera, C. Car- bone, V. F. Cardone, S. Casas, S. Clesse, S. Ili´ c, M. Kil- 21 binger, T. Kitching, M. Kunz, F. Lacasa, E. Linder, E. Majerotto, K. Markoviˇ c, M. Martinelli, V. Pettorino, A. Pourtsidou, Z. Sakr, A. G. S´ anchez, D. Sapo...

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Huterer and M

    D. Huterer and M. White, Nulling tomography with weak gravitational lensing, Phys. Rev. D 72, 043002 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0501451 [astro-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Joachimi and P

    B. Joachimi and P. Schneider, The removal of shear- ellipticity correlations from the cosmic shear signal via nulling techniques, Astronomy & Astrophysics 488, 829 (2008), arXiv:0804.2292 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  18. [26]

    D. N. Limber, The Analysis of Counts of the Extragalac- tic Nebulae in Terms of a Fluctuating Density Field. II., Astrophys. J. 119, 655 (1954)

    1954

  19. [27]

    Touzeau, F

    D. Touzeau, F. Bernardeau, K. Benabed, and S. Codis, Cosmic Shear Nulling as a geometrical cosmologi- cal probe: methodology and sensitivity to cosmo- logical parameters and systematics, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2502.02246 (2025), arXiv:2502.02246 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  20. [28]

    J. S. Bullock, T. S. Kolatt, Y. Sigad, R. S. Somerville, A. V. Kravtsov, A. A. Klypin, J. R. Primack, and A. Dekel, Profiles of dark haloes: evolution, scatter and environment, MNRAS 321, 559 (2001), arXiv:astro- ph/9908159 [astro-ph]

    2001

  21. [29]

    Figure 3 shows that the parameter AB [24] can specifically bias the power spectrum for k >1 Mpc−1, potentially resulting in a bi- ased S8 if left uncorrected

    demonstrated that a biased model for the nonlin- ear power spectrum, such as one influenced by baryonic physics, could lead to a tension in S8. Figure 3 shows that the parameter AB [24] can specifically bias the power spectrum for k >1 Mpc−1, potentially resulting in a bi- ase...

  22. [30]

    A. J. Mead, C. Heymans, L. Lombriser, J. A. Peacock, O. I. Steele, and H. A. Winther, Accurate halo-model matter power spectra with dark energy, massive neutri- nos and modified gravitational forces, MNRAS 459, 1468 (2016), arXiv:1602.02154 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Touzeau, F

    D. Touzeau, F. Bernardeau, K. Benabed, and S. Codis, Novel geometrical test of cosmological expansion from photometric data, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2502.02243 (2025), arXiv:2502.02243 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Yoon and M

    M. Yoon and M. J. Jee, Baryonic Feedback Measurement From KV450 Cosmic Shear Analysis, Astrophys. J. 908, 13 (2021), arXiv:2007.16166 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Gu, M.-A

    S. Gu, M.-A. Dor, L. van Waerbeke, M. Asgari, A. Mead, T. Tr¨ oster, and Z. Yan, On constraining cosmology and the halo mass function with weak gravitational lens- ing, MNRAS 525, 4871 (2023), arXiv:2302.00780 [astro- ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Piccirilli, M

    G. Piccirilli, M. Zennaro, C. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, and D. Alonso, Robust cosmic shear with small-scale nulling, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2502.17339 (2025), arXiv:2502.17339 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Amon and G

    A. Amon and G. Efstathiou, A non-linear solution to the S8 tension?, MNRAS 516, 5355 (2022), arXiv:2206.11794 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Heymans, T

    C. Heymans, T. Tr¨ oster, M. Asgari, C. Blake, H. Hilde- brandt, B. Joachimi, K. Kuijken, C.-A. Lin, A. G. S´ anchez, J. L. van den Busch, A. H. Wright, A. Amon, M. Bilicki, J. de Jong, M. Crocce, A. Dvornik, T. Erben, M. C. Fortuna, F. Getman, B. Giblin, K. Glazebrook, H. Hoe...

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Takahashi, M

    R. Takahashi, M. Sato, T. Nishimichi, A. Taruya, and M. Oguri, Revising the Halofit Model for the Nonlinear Matter Power Spectrum, Astrophys. J. 761, 152 (2012), arXiv:1208.2701 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Schneider and R

    A. Schneider and R. Teyssier, A new method to quan- tify the effects of baryons on the matter power spec- trum, JCAP 2015, 049 (2015), arXiv:1510.06034 [astro- ph.CO]

    2015 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Schneider, R

    A. Schneider, R. Teyssier, J. Stadel, N. E. Chisari, A. M. C. Le Brun, A. Amara, and A. Refregier, Quantify- ing baryon effects on the matter power spectrum and the weak lensing shear correlation, JCAP 2019, 020 (2019), arXiv:1810.08629 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    S. M. L. Vogt, D. J. E. Marsh, and A. Lagu¨ e, ax- ionHMcode: Non-linear power spectrum calculator, As- trophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2307.005 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    N. E. Chisari, D. Alonso, E. Krause, C. D. Leonard, P. Bull, J. Neveu, A. S. Villarreal, S. Singh, T. McClin- tock, J. Ellison, Z. Du, J. Zuntz, A. Mead, S. Joudaki, C. S. Lorenz, T. Tr¨ oster, J. Sanchez, F. Lanusse, M. Ishak, R. Hlozek, J. Blazek, J.-E. Campagne, H. Al- moub...

    2019 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Man- delbaum, T

    The LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration, R. Man- delbaum, T. Eifler, R. Hloˇ zek, T. Collett, E. Gawiser, D. Scolnic, D. Alonso, H. Awan, R. Biswas, J. Blazek, P. Burchat, N. E. Chisari, I. Dell’Antonio, S. Digel, J. Frieman, D. A. Goldstein, I. Hook, ˇZ. Ivezi´ c, S. M. Ka...

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Reischke, S

    R. Reischke, S. Unruh, M. Asgari, A. Dvornik, H. Hilde- brandt, B. Joachimi, L. Porth, M. von Wietersheim- Kramsta, J. L. van den Busch, B. St¨ olzner, A. H. Wright, Z. Yan, M. Bilicki, P. Burger, J. Harnois- 22 Deraps, C. Georgiou, C. Heymans, P. Jalan, S. Joudaki, K. Kuijken...

    2024

  36. [44]

    J. U. Lange, Nautilus: A High-Efficiency Bayesian Sam- pler for Astronomy, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, American Astronomical Society Meet- ing Abstracts, Vol. 244 (2024) p. 229.02

    2024

  37. [45]

    Lewis, GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1910.13970 (2019), arXiv:1910.13970 [astro-ph.IM]

    A. Lewis, GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1910.13970 (2019), arXiv:1910.13970 [astro-ph.IM]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Fronenberg, A

    H. Fronenberg, A. S. Maniyar, A. Liu, and A. R. Pullen, New Probe of the High-z Baryon Acoustic Os- cillation Scale: BAO Tomography with CMB ×LIM -Nulling Convergence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 241001 (2024), arXiv:2309.07215 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  39. [47]

    https://github.com/ShimingGu/BNT_PRD/

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.